User talk:J. Smile (Love & V.A.V.I)

Feel free to talk with me by edit this pages. The message will be removed once the problem is resolved for a while. Please do not just merely use template message as a notice, except {{Alert}} template, like how I try my best to write message in my words.

Please don't template me! Everybody makes mistakes, and this user finds user warning templates impersonal and disrespectful. If there's something you'd like to say, please take a moment to write a comment below in your own words.

October 2021

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).

J. Smile (Love & V.A.V.I) (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The admin might have blocked because of misunderstanding my intention. See below for more. 1Way4Together - J. Smile | Please comment on content, not on me 14:52, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I think this block is preventing disruption, and this request does not assure me that things will change, so I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 16:45, 26 October 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.

Apologize and promise

Hi, it's me again. I'm very sorry for Drmies and 331dot for inconvience. At first I didn't understand too much why I am blocked because I though it was unfair, bias, ... But now, I have understand that I have created Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Hot Issue (group) is unacceptable because it's Wikipedia:Block evasion, which may lead to more sanctions. I also have detagging for the pages I given above despite being creator, which is unacceptable too. So, I believe that this blocked should be lifted for the reason I given in template below:

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).

J. Smile (Love & V.A.V.I) (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The block is no longer necessary because I understand what I am blocked for, and I will not do it again, and I will make productive contributions instead. More specially, I promise with English wikipedia community as well as all admin, that if I get unblocked: 1. If someone don't want me to edit due to disruptive editing, I will add the pages to User:J. Smile (Love & V.A.V.I)/Pages won't be edited directly, so that I will take it to talk at every time I edit, except when revert vandalism or correct grammar and typo. Policies and guidelines will be automatically added
2. I won't start XfD directly should I still get blocked in WP space (if admin wants to), instead I will raise the issue to article talk pages to get 3rd opinion first.
3. If I create any pages, and get tagged for deletion, should I disagree I will have to talk with user or raise to talk pages first.
4. I won't add controversy-related information randomly without discuss in talk pages first
Should admin wants more unblock conditions, admin may list it in below to let me know
If I violate any unblock conditions above, I shall take all responsibity and sanctions, from temporary block to pernament block, depend on situation. If it's granted, I won't waste it.

Decline reason:

Sorry, but I really don't think you should be fixing grammar on English Wikipedia. Some of your comments are incomprehensible. It's even worse that you're leaving custom-written notes to people, like this one, where you tell someone that improving an article is hopeless, so they should go to some other website. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:28, 31 October 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.

Can you remove it for me please? I wish to revoke this message (not an disruptive post, this message exist to show that I want to retract this bad message, since no one remove it). I promise that I won't post message like that again 1Way4Together - J. Smile | Please comment on content, not on me 09:32, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What I will edit after I get unblocked: Kpop-related and music-related articles, although I may correct typo or grammar in other articles.

Though English is not my primary language, I use English almost every day, even in my social. Plus, I have interested to contribute to this project.

--1Way4Together - J. Smile | Please comment on content, not on me 13:35, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify of block and action

@Drmies: Hi, sorry if I disturb you. You block me for reason "Disruptive editing--incompetence, user trying to work around a topic ban". I would be appreciate if you (or another admin) can clarify how imcompetence of me were, and how disruptive of my editing were, to I can learn from it and avoid in future if I am unblocked. To describe, provide diff or permalink then describle as clearly as possible. Thanks you. 1Way4Together - J. Smile | Please comment on content, not on me 08:40, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Above, NinjaRobotPirate indicated some of the many problems. In general, you were warned on 13 August by valereee to stop editing "Wikipedia:" pages, and yet you continued, with incomprehensible edits like this one, and then after you were blocked from that namespace, particularly because of the weird deletion-related things you were doing, you tried to circumvent that ban by posting a poorly written deletion request in Wikipedia talk space--like this, "Doesn't meet general notabity guidelines: Not charting in digital gaon chart at all, and in gaon album chart they only in top 10. also not much source mention the group in a substantive way. Also nominate Pixy (group) for same reason", on Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Hot Issue (group). And then you started PRODding articles, making improper and undiscussed mergers such as this, etc.
Here is the thing. There are things you might could do here, but the things you should not do, you kept on doing--and though you said "I know that I'm wrong. I understand your reason. I promise that I won't edit policy page in an un-constructive way again" in your first unblock request, on 1 September 2021, you went ahead and did it anyway. Now you're being told that you shouldn't be correcting grammar if your hold on English is so tenuous--and you ask me for clarification in a note that has probably a dozen grammatical errors. By now, you should know what your strong points are, and what your weak points are--and asking this kind of question is just not productive and a time sink for me. Drmies (talk) 17:15, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
J. Smile, I'm sorry, but I agree with Drmies. You shouldn't be correcting grammar on English WP, and you've multiple times shown us you aren't willing to stay away from policy. Here we always have to weigh the positive contributions against the problems caused, and you cause more work than you accomplish, which makes you a net negative here. I'm sorry, I know that probably feels harsh. Maybe go edit at Vietnamese WP, gain some maturity and more experience with English, and come back in a year or so? —valereee (talk) 20:03, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My strong point is have knowledge about English, as I use english everyday. The weak point of me is many times I cause disruptive and delete because of my strong feelings, and make poor grammar which makes everyone have to clean up my work. Maybe I should refrain from delete article and correct grammar and instead post it to talk page for community review. As a blocking administrator, if you unblock me in future, what are you expected for me to I won't be more disruptive, and what unblock conditions you want to imposed for me? For English, I have used it for about years, because I use it in my social network (I don't want to disclose it here). 1Way4Together - J. Smile | Please comment on content, not on me 00:49, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

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).

J. Smile (Love & V.A.V.I) (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

After I read comments from 3 administrator above, I have understand that 1. I should not correct grammar on en-wiki so that break the perfect grammar that sentence had, because most of my edits in the past make editor has to clean up and then sanction has to be imposed ;2. I should not mass proposed article for deletion as deletion is not meant for cleanup; 3. Per NinjaRobotPirate (see above), I should not leave custom message that would throw away editors. Per WP:ICANTHEARYOU, I should have listened other editors instead of do it anyway despite warning. For all of reason above, I want my editing privilege back to I can have second chance to make productive contributions, try to improve article, and stay away if not have enough competence rather than attempt to delete it; and do not make stress for other editors. I would be appericate and try to be good editor if I get unblocked. Thanks

Decline reason:

You are clearly very keen to contribute, and I really dislike having to turn you away. However, I have made an extensive check of your editing history, and I have found scarcely any editing which made significant improvements, and huge amounts of editing which made things worse, either directly or by taking other editors away from more useful work while they cleared up after you. What is more, it is clear both from things you wrote in various places before the block and from what you have said here in connection with your unblock requests, that you really don't understand what the problems are, which means that you are unlikely to be able to avoid similar problems in future, even if you honestly intend to do so. Apart from other problems, your competence at English is very low, and yet you are so unaware of that fact that you describe your grasp of English as your strong point. Both lack of competence at English and lack of awareness of one's own limitations are bound to be serious handicaps in contributing to an English language encyclopaedia. I am sincerely sorry to have to say this, but with the best will in the world, I can't see it as at all likely that allowing you to return to editing would benefit the encyclopaedia. JBW (talk) 11:52, 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.

@JBW: I know that I have pretty long history of negative behaviour, but that's in the past. I don't say the block is improper, but just try to give me a chance for correct my mistake. Do you want to know what contributions I intend if I get unblocked? 1Way4Together - J. Smile | Please comment on content, not on me 11:58, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By all means tell me what contributions you intend to make, and I will consider whether they justify unblocking. However, it would have to be a kind of editing which would not involve writing any article content at all; if after all that has been said above you can write "give me a chance for correct my mistake" then that much is clear. JBW (talk) 12:32, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I want to retract comments [1] as per NinjaRobotPirate has notify me that this seems throw editor away. Secondly, I want to update information in Simply K-pop, seems few people notice it, I want to update information to it up-to-date; Thirdly, as I'm tired of adding controversies and per a comment send me in few months, I will cease to add controversies start from this unblock, at least only add it when consensus reached.

User:Drmies, as a enforcing administrator, and User:JBW, as a reviewing administrator: If you feel that I should not do something I mention above then let me know. Thanks you 1Way4Together - J. Smile | Please comment on content, not on me 12:40, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since Drmies has edited since you posted the above mention but has not responded to your message, I assume that they have nothing to add. As far as I'm concerned, I'm afraid almost every sentence that you have written here contains errors in English. Some of them are only minor errors, but there are far too many of them for it to be a good idea for you to write content of an English language encyclopaedia. I can fully understand that sticking to just editing Vietnamese Wikipedia must be less satisfying than contributing to English Wikipedia, because of the global reach of English, but I'm afraid that really is the best advice to you. I really do hate having to be so discouraging, but I really don't think there's any more that I can usefully say. JBW (talk) 17:11, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia:2RR" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Wikipedia:2RR and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 22#Wikipedia:2RR until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. FAdesdae378 (talk · contribs) 02:02, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request (again)

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).

J. Smile (Love & V.A.V.I) (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi, I made request to admin review this block is because after few years passed (I initially want to back on June 2022 but I decided to delay it to July 2023), I have decided to comeback on this wikipedia project after I know the what I did wrong is: Firstly, I evade this sanction: I have realized that I should not evade this sanction because imagine if everyone do it, then what's the point of moderation but instead I should accept that and use this as a way to reflect my mistake. Secondly, I should not try to mass nominate article of deletion just because I don't like it, because it disrupt community and it doesn't help article anyway. Third, I should listen to people because there's somewhere that common sense need to apply, and I should stop it people don't want me to do so. And finally, I should strike for better grammar, so that everyone else don't need to revert edit or revise it again, thus wasting their time. With some of contribution on other wiki (including fandom, ...) on the time I blocked, I believe I can have enough ability to comeback to wiki, as part of Wikipedia:Standard offer. 1Way4Together - J. Smile Please comment on content, not on me 05:48, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

After reading the above request, I am not convinced that your written English skills are high enough to contribute here. English Wikipedia is not the "premier" or "best" language wiki: all languages need editors to improve their articles. I think you should focus on your native language's wiki and come back to English Wikipedia when your English has improved. Z1720 (talk) 18:17, 10 August 2023 (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.

Someone else will review this, but I suggest that you remove the "retired" banner if your intention is to come back. I'm still not convinced your English skills are sufficient to participate here- have you tried contributing in the Wikipedia of your primary language? There is nothing special about the English Wikipedia, it is not the "premier" Wikipedia. All language versions of Wikipedia are equal. 331dot (talk) 07:20, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I removed it. For your question, yes, I tried to contribute viwiki in the time that I get blocked, without disrupt it. J.Smile - luck or not (talk) 09:31, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]