User talk:Justinboyer

Orphaned non-free media (File:Lady Gaga's meat dress.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Lady Gaga's meat dress.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:21, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Justinboyer, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

—Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 02:21, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Block appeal

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).

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

Request reason:

(Please reference: User talk:CityMorgue) I unintentionally created a sockpuppet account after this account was blocked. It was not my intention to break the rules of Wikipedia. My only motive was to become a productive contributor, and as evident in my contributions under User:CityMorgue, I have been a productive contributor, only making edits when beneficial to the readers of Wikipedia. I would prefer to continue editing using my CityMorgue account, however I keep being declined the appeal because of this account, which I have no interest in keeping. Please look over my previous appeals via User talk:CityMorgue and consider unblocking me from a WP:STANDARD OFFER approach. I appreciate any help with this. Thank you so much, I love this community and would very much like to continue to be apart of it.

The block is no longer necessary because I understand what I am blocked for, I will not do it again, and I will continue to make productive contributions to Wikipedia.

@justinboyer 14:40, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I will shortly accept an unblock for the account you wish to continue using, User talk:CityMorgue. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 14:47, 8 August 2014 (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.

@PhilKnight and Yunshui: Hey, just wanted to let you both know that I (CityMorgue) put in appeal for this account to be unblocked as per your recommendations. I would also like to notify Courcelles. Thank you all for taking the time to look over my block. Whatever consensus is reached, I will respect the decision. Thank you, and I'm sorry for the inconvenience this has caused. @justinboyer 18:09, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Block appeal

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).

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

Request reason:

Hello, just wanted to let you know this account was blocked two years ago and the blocking administrator hasn't been active in a month. Not sure if that is the reason for delay in response but I would appreciate someone taking a look at my request. Thank you. @justinboyer 22:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I will shortly accept an unblock for the account you wish to continue using, User talk:CityMorgue. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 14:47, 8 August 2014 (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.

To any reviweing admin, please consider his request, as I believe that he/she can contribute constructively and has learned his/her lesson. I'm willing to keep him under editor review or adopt. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 14:43, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, yeah, I think my absence had something to do with the delays here. Nothing I can offer but an apology and that eye surgery sucks for computer time... anyway, I talked with Salvidrim! about this this morning, and think a monitored unblock was the right decision. Courcelles 14:53, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Oprah signs off.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Oprah signs off.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:11, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]