User talk:Iiar

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Dhatsavan, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! RJFJR (talk) 21:48, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I guess I'm supposed to say Thank You.--Dhatsavan 11:42, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kepler orbit

Thanks for fixing the perhaps rather nit picking point I raised on this. Probably should have done it myself but I don't edit much and I'm a bit rusty. Dave59 (talk) 13:13, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dude Perfect

The article, as written, didn't make any claim of notability at all — it just demonstrated, with only primary sources and no reliable ones, that they exist, which isn't the same thing.

That doesn't mean they can never have an article. If you can write one which makes a proper claim of notability and cites proper sources, then by all means go for it — but the original version wasn't cutting it. Bearcat (talk) 18:43, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cosmic microwave background, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Empty space. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

April 2016

Hello, I'm DVdm. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Preferred frame, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. DVdm (talk) 19:12, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have reverted all your Jesubalan edits per wp:primary source. See Google Scholar, Google Books: nothing relevant. See also wp:FRINGE and wp:UNDUE. - DVdm (talk) 19:17, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you like, you can comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics#Jesubalan primary source, fringe, undue. - DVdm (talk) 19:27, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Niter (2nd nomination)

Could you please revert this close here? I think this needs to be closed by an admin. I believe your close was questionable here. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 01:16, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted the close but could not get it relisted.-- pretty IittIe Iiar 10:08, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Black Kite (talk) 10:16, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:54, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Iiar (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I don't recall what was in user:iiar/kikes. I definitely did not intend to abuse my account account or to violate any copyright. I promise not to do it again if you can tell me what was in it. I request you to unblock me. Thank you. pretty IittIe Iiar 00:28, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 00:31, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Iiar (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I don't know the reason for this block. Based on the edit history of my talk page I am assuming that it has something to do with copyright infringement

I don't recall what was in user:iiar/Kikes. I definitely did not intend to abuse my account account or to violate any copyright. I promise not to do it again if you can tell me what was in it. I request you to unblock me. Thank you.  pretty IittIe  Iiar 00:28, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You're blocked for intentionally logging out to make disruptive edits. See WP:LOGOUT. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:03, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Iiar (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I think I know what you are referring to as disruptive edits. I promise that I won't do it again. pretty IittIe Iiar 01:39, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This is not for disruptive edits, it's a checkuser block - that means you've been abusing multiple accounts. Guy (help!) 23:04, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You will have to be more explicit if you want to allow us to ascertain that you really do understand what the problem was. A little more than "I won't do it again" would also be helpful, particularly given your history. Huon (talk) 03:30, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are not permitted to blank declined unblock requests for your currently active block. Do not do so again. --Yamla (talk) 12:24, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The reviewing administrator is not supposed to edit the text of my request and break the links therein, are they? Yet, that happened. pretty IittIe Iiar 03:48, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Iiar (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I admit to making this edit. I don't remember exactly what it was but it had something to do with the whistleblower identity, which is a violation of BLP. At that time, I did not understand how big an infringement of BLP it was. I know better now. I promise to adhere strictly to BLP and all other policies of this site in the future. And yeah, this is my only account. pretty IittIe Iiar 03:48, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As noted, you haven't actually addressed the reason for the block. I am declining your request, that leave you with UTRS to make further appeals, as noted below. I would strongly suggest that you not do so immediately. 331dot (talk) 12:24, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You've obviously been working hard to go out of your way to be malicious. None of your four unblock requests have properly addressed this. To prevent you wasting more of our time, I have revoked your talk page access. This leaves you with WP:UTRS if your current request is declined. Frankly, though, given how hard you have worked to harm Wikipedia, I can't see them unblocking you. --Yamla (talk) 11:46, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]