User talk:LongDistance06

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent copyright infringements. You have received a very large number of warnings about this, on the talk pages of two accounts, over a period of seven years, but you have ignored the warnings, your only response to them being to remove them from your talk pages, and continue infringing copyright. Several times you have been warned that continuing in the same way would be likely to lead to being blocked, and you should have been blocked years ago. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. In place of "Your reason here", give your reason why you think you should be unblocked. That reason should be such as to persuade the administrator who reviews your unblock request that you understand the reason for the block, and will not continue to infringe copyright. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:05, 13 November 2015 (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).

LongDistance06 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

original unblock reason

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

understand what you have been blocked for,
will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:26, 1 December 2015 (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.

Your unblock template is incomplete. When you complete it, by including a reason as to why we should unblock you, you will need to explain, in detail, your understanding of copyright policy as it applies within Wikipedia, and also explain why you ignored the multiple messages regarding your copyright violations posted on this page. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 22:13, 29 November 2015 (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).

LongDistance06 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand what you have been blocked for copyright. I will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and will make useful contributions instead.

Decline reason:

You need to be more detailed than that. MER-C 20:27, 1 December 2015 (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).

LongDistance06 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand what you have been blocked for copyright. I will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and will make useful contributions instead. I am a track and field certified coach and official. Wikipedia is one voice for the general public to find track and field athletes and events. I hope to contribute to the sport of Track and Field through youth encouragement, mentoring new officials and broadcasting exciting events that happen when people set goals, dedicate the ambitions in their lives, seeks guidance and support and achieve those goals. Track and Field is a unique vehicle where people can change their life. God bless.

Decline reason:

you will not be unblocked until you give satisfactory answers to the questions already put to you. Also note that if you blank this page again, about which you have already been warned, you will be prevented from editing here. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 20:50, 25 January 2016 (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.

I have restored the previous declined unblock requests - as long as the block they refer to is in place they must remain present so reviewing admins have the full facts of the case. As for your comments here, I'll let the previous admins handle a review, but there are a few questions you can answer that will help them greatly - do you understand the copyright policy of Wikipedia? Do you understand that Wikipedia is not for promotion or advertising of sporting events and is not a directory of past or upcoming events? - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 14:19, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia is one voice for the general public to find track and field athletes and events" - that suggests to me that you see Wikipedia as a marketing tool. Please understand that as well as not allowing copyright violations, Wikipedia does not allow advertising or promotion, even of charities and good causes. Peridon (talk) 11:52, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you have not made it clear that you understand the reason for your block, or explained in what ways your editing in future will differ from what you have done in the past. Unfortunately, experience shows that editors who just say things as general as "I will not continue to cause damage or disruption", very often do not actually understand the reason for the block, and if unblocked they are very likely to continue in the same way. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 21:56, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to the African Destubathon

Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 53 African countries, so should be enjoyable! So it would be a good chance to win something for improving stubs on African sportspeople, including footballers, athletes, Olympians and Paralympians etc, particularly female ones, but also male. Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance (think Regions of countries etc). If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing a few expanded articles on African Paralympians, Olympians and committees etc, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, LongDistance06. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Detweiller Park course

The article Detweiller Park course has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Created by a banned copyright violator. Uses cut-and-paste phrases from at least 2, possibly 3, websites that has the text earlier than Wikipedia. Also, questionable notability (see Talk:Detweiller Park course).

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Closeapple (talk) 22:59, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021

UTRS decline

I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you at this time. Please describe in greater detail how your editing was unconstructive and how you would edit constructively if unblocked. Please read Wikipedia's Guide to appealing blocks for more information. As you still have access to your talk page, please post your unblock request to your user talk page, omitting any off-Wiki personally identifying information. If you have not already done so, please place the following at the bottom of your talk page, filling in "Your reason here "

 {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Thank you for your attention to these matters.

UTRS appeal #43180 --Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:11, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]