User talk:J341933

Courtland High School

Hi... I changed your addition to Courtland High School a little bit. Using the phrase "best known for... " (or "known best for....") is an opinion. Others might feel it's known best for it's architecture, a notable student, academics, etc. I also put a tag near the football championships information. I don't doubt it's true, but a claim like that should have a reference. I'm sure a quick search in the Free-Lance Star will produce something. :) Cheers! Wikipelli ^Talk 15:05, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May 2012

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Historical Jesus. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Old Moonraker (talk) 09:50, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! J341933, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Sarah (talk) 19:28, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your article has been moved to AfC space

Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:J341933/William Eivind Hall has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/William Eivind Hall, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article. Your draft is waiting for a review by an experienced editor, if you have any questions please ask on our Help Desk! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 20:52, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/William Eivind Hall.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the reviewer's talk page

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Sionk (talk) 03:01, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As the basic Wikipedia notability guidelines say (and as repeated in my message on the draft article), a subject needs to have been talked about in-depth in multiple reliable sources (e.g. newspapers, magazines, books) to be notable. In this case, the subject is mentioned only briefly in one newspaper article, so doesn't meet Wikipedia's basic notability requirements. Sionk (talk) 15:01, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of William Eivind Hall

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on William Eivind Hall requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Sionk (talk) 15:11, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of William Eivind Hall for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article William Eivind Hall is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Eivind Hall until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/William Eivind Hall concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/William Eivind Hall, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 16:17, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Achael Drorim

The article Achael Drorim has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Nat Gertler (talk) 19:33, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Edna Elena Gerber

Hello J341933,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Edna Elena Gerber for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Ish dar ian 12:40, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, J341933. You have new messages at Ishdarian's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Also, please refrain from removing CSD tags from articles you have created. Thank you. Ish dar ian 13:00, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Doug, you really need to stop. You've introduced several edits of the last couple weeks with no reliable sources to back up your claims. You should really take a look at WP:N, WP:RS, and WP:AUTOBIO before going any further. Wikipedia isn't here for you to promote yourself. Ish dar ian 13:29, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 13:05, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Siamese Twin Mental Disorder for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Siamese Twin Mental Disorder is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siamese Twin Mental Disorder until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ansh6 6 6 07:27, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Siamese Twin Mental Disorder

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Siamese Twin Mental Disorder, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. The page has been nominated for deletion, in accordance with Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:05, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN discussion

A discussion regarding your edits has started at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive253#Very slow but long-term disruption. You are free to comment there (as long as you aren't blocked for some very problematic editing, that is). Fram (talk) 12:54, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

As it has become clear that you are a returning sock with a pattern of long time disruption and vandalism, you have been indefinitely blocked. Fram (talk) 07:04, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your article submission William Eivind Hall

Hello J341933. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled William Eivind Hall.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/William Eivind Hall}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 08:01, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

J341933 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

127.0.0.1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "J341933". The reason given for J341933's block is: "Long-term pattern of vandalism: Plus sockpuppetry and other disruption".

Blocking administrator: Fram (talk • blocks)

Decline reason: Your block is not an autoblock. Kinu ^t/_c 20:49, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock | reason=taking my mood stabilizer to prevent bipolar type 1 Douglas Eivind Hall 20:17, 17 August 2014 (UTC)}

Proposed deletion of William Eivind Hall

The article William Eivind Hall has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Blanked by new account that claims to be article creator. Far too many other edits for G7, even if true. Procedural PROD to give it a proper chance at deletion, or give someone else a chance to save it. IMHO, notability appears marginal at best anyway. The given reason for blanking was:

"I created this page but the sources where not valid of my father so the whole page is deleted now."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TexasAndroid (talk) 12:41, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of William Eivind Hall for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article William Eivind Hall is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Eivind Hall (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Safiel (talk) 21:13, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Socking and vandalism

I am guilty of using multiple wikipedia usernames and vandalsim. Please close douglaseivindhallgerber for socking and also unblock J341933 since I no longer am a vandal. Thanks.

Just in case some unblock request materializes: I spoke to someone in the IRC help chat who said they were J341933. I see no reason to doubt that they were. Based on the conversation I'd strongly object to an unblock. They are unable to work in a collaborative editing environment. Huon (talk) 17:45, 13 August 2017 (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).

J341933 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

my health is much better

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. 331dot (talk) 08:34, 29 May 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).

J341933 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

First allow me to write that I do not know if all Administrators are human or if some are AI software units who review wikipedia.org. In the past I had many medical illnesses and disabilities, some where not understood by the medical community. Now, they have been cured or fixed. So now if I do decide to edit any more entries, preferably in French, I will make sure I put a reference with the edit. Thanks.

Decline reason:

Administrators are all human (or lizard people). Please read WP:GAB to understand how to craft an acceptable unblock request. This one is bizarre, to say the least. This is the English Wikipedia; if you want to edit in French, you are on the wrong project. Your health is essentially irrelevant to your block. And you need to address your vandalism, sockpuppetry, and other disruption. Yamla (talk) 14:10, 29 May 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.

[[unblock reviewed | I disagree with you Yamla about my health being irrelevant to having been blocked. My health includes being severely abused abused when I was in Sar El in Madinat Israel and the U.S. Army. Health includes one's brain being abused by negligent and abusive supervisors as I was in Sar El at Batzap outside of Tel Aviv and in U. S. Army at Fort Knox and West Point. Do you want me to go beyond the tip of the iceburg about being abused. How about being poisoned intentially by doctors in New York City. I can go into much further detail now.}}

You were blocked for vandalism, sockpuppetry, and disruption. I'm sorry for your health concerns, but you need to address your vandalism, sockpuppetry, and disruption, and you need to do so directly. If you were mentally ill (and I mean no disrespect here), you'll need to explain why that lead you to harm Wikipedia and how we can be sure this will never happen again. This would be a challenging case to make. But again, you need to directly address your repeated attempts to harm Wikipedia and flaunt our policies. --Yamla (talk) 14:41, 29 May 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).

J341933 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Fine, so I can just go to another interactive online encyclopedia website then. You say I have attempted to harm this webiste. You are obviously wrong. It is amazing that you know nothing and are so calous about people who have had psychiatric disorders and other serious medical disorders. Are you one of those Nazis who came over from Germany after WWII in the CIA operation Paperclip?

Please include a decline or accept reason.

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.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.