User talk:Evaline Nakano

Archives

Message to 2603:8080:4740:9f:1c99:2107:d796:ccb0

Thou art but a ragamuffin of the worst horridity in kind. Be gone from this page, and desist of your urchin ways! Evaline Nakano (talk) 13:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(

November 2021

Welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for reverting your recent experiment with the page George W. Bush. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use your sandbox instead, as someone could see your edit before you revert it. Explodicator7331 (talk) 19:54, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent contributions to User:Evaline Nakano/test9

Hello, I'm Evaline Nakano. An edit that you recently made to User:Evaline Nakano/test9 seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks!

Hello, I'm Evaline Nakano. An edit that you recently made to George W. Bush seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Evaline Nakano (talk) 10:39, 11 December 2021 (UTC) Hello, I'm Evaline Nakano. An edit that you recently made seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Evaline Nakano (talk) 10:40, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Evaline Nakano. An edit that you recently made to George W. Bush seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Evaline Nakano (talk) 10:41, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 2021

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to Farbman, even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use your sandbox. Thank you. SuperMarioMan (Talk) 12:30, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I know the edit has been reverted... because I reverted it. What exactly was the point of this message? Evaline Nakano (talk) 07:27, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Cymande, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. SuperMarioMan (Talk) 12:31, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Evaline Nakano, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Halal-haram-hallam‎ (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. clpo13_(talk) 19:22, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Eulamprotes wilkella.
Your test edits have become disruptive. If you make any more of them in main article space – like this one – you will be blocked from editing.
As you have already been instructed, use your sandbox instead.
SuperMarioMan (Talk) 23:17, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, I self-reverted, chill, it's cool. I will not be doing any more tests like this outside of Sandbox/user spaces etc. Evaline Nakano (talk) 23:25, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hamitabat power station

Hello,

I am a bit confused by your message on my talk page - I don't see any reverted edits - perhaps you mean a different article - if I have done something wrong please could you explain further either on my talk page or by pinging me from the article talk page.

Have a nice day

Chidgk1 (talk) 12:47, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, ignore that message from me. Got mixed up! Evaline Nakano (talk) 23:26, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, wondering why you are reverting edits

On List of Symphyotrichum species. I'm intentionally making these changes because of how the text shows up in the app. I am the one who has completely revamped the page and it is in the queue to be evaluated as a featured list. Maybe you could unrevert and then bring up any concerns you have there? Eewilson (talk) 10:28, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On first glance the edits appeared to be removing content. If they are not formatting correctly in the app then feel free to restore those versions with a comment in the edit summary so this doesn't happen again. Evaline Nakano (talk) 10:31, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer that you revert your own editing. Otherwise it will appear as though you are being a disruptive editor. There does seem to be a pattern on your talk page and in your edit histories of this. Please revert your change. Thank you. Eewilson (talk) 10:36, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough - appreciate your concern. Done Evaline Nakano (talk) 10:49, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Please be aware that I have reported this incident to the administrators. Eewilson (talk) 10:57, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Eewilson (talk) 10:57, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please can you explain why you made this edit and why I shouldn't block you for it? You should never edit other people's talk pages without their permission, aside from a few exceptions such as blatant vandalism. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:00, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies - not my finest moment. I'm reviewing recent changes and clearly didn't pay enough attention (until it was too late - hence the revert). Think I'm gonna cool off for a bit. Evaline Nakano (talk) 11:05, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would advise you to stop reviewing recent changes completely and do something else. You are making too many mistakes and causing editors to have to clean up after you, and it's getting to the point where anything else of that nature may result in a block. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:07, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. Evaline Nakano (talk) 11:16, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apology & request to be unblocked

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).

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

Request reason:

First off, please accept my apologies for things progressing as they have, and for my behaviour and any disruption caused (albeit unintentionally). I'll address some of the points raised in the ANI thread: 1. Halal-haram-hallam. This was also my account, won't be denying that. I hadn't realised how much it was frowned upon to use 2 accounts (in case anyone thinks I was being sneaky, I wasn't trying to hide this - I even used this account to create a "joke" user page for the other account). It's clear this is taken very seriously though - so I'd ask that you forgive me, will unblock only this account and I will abandon the other. I will certainly not do anything like this again. 2. My edits. I agree that my competence level has been questionable. I was trying to practice quickly scanning recent changes and reverting as quickly as possible (i.e. faster than others). But I made a ton of mistakes - including warning users while failing to actually rollback the edit, reverting innocent talk page messages, and in some cases reverting edits that appeared to be removing content but legitimately so. On Rick's advice I would give this a very wide berth. Indeed I did stop when he asked. It was mentioned that I might be "edit-farming". I'm not sure why this is - I'm not requesting to be an admin or anything like that and have no interest in being so. I'd prefer to learn how to be a constructive editor first. Originally I wanted to be a recent changes patroller, and a fast one at that. But given what I've said in point 2 I'll switch to something else. I'm honestly not that bothered about contributing articles, but I'd like to be involved in community activities, such as voting on AFDs. Thanks, Eve

Decline reason:

Oh goodness no, you lack sufficient competence to be voting on AFDs and engaging in other community activities. Yamla (talk) 10:23, 15 December 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

Ok, understood. Is there anything you'd be willing to allow me to help out with? I'd appreciate the second chance. Evaline Nakano (talk) 11:24, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

At this point I reckon you're just trolling – the cogency of your posts here, in contrast with your persistently unconstructive edits elsewhere, leads me to think you know full well what you're doing. This is on top of your broken promises to stop testing in mainspace as well as your CheckUser-confirmed misuse of another account. I'm upping this block to exclude talk page access; if you want to appeal further, you can follow the instructions in the template below. SuperMarioMan (Talk) 19:49, 16 December 2021 (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.

December 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. SuperMarioMan (Talk) 19:49, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]