User talk:LuxDavid

Plis unban me. You banned me 3 years ago, I was young and stupid. Please I promise I won't vandalise

February 2019

{{destruir|Continuo abuso de plantillas en mi pagina de discusion de usuario}} Hello, I'm Abelmoschus Esculentus. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Jódar— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 11:47, 20 February 2019 (UTC) {{Aviso nombre inapropiado}} Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Castellar, Jaén. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk • contribs) 11:53, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Vindecīk van gern-daf (February 21)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by StraussInTheHouse were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Vindecīk van gern-daf and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Vindecīk van gern-daf, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SITH (talk) 13:17, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LuxDavid! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! SITH (talk) 13:17, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

Hello, I'm Amiodarone. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Spanish Water Dog have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. AmioDarone (talk) 11:52, 25 March 2019 (

PedrixCake (talk) 07:10, 6 June 2019 (

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

(See also User talk:PedrixCake, User talk:Holybreen.)

– Athaenara ✉ 16:41, 6 June 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

Please, unblock me, I know that I put things that I should not put in PedrixCake Talk Page, but he also wrote some messages on my Talk Page, I know that things weren’t good, but I won’t do that things anymore. ThanksLuxDavid (talk) 10:57, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This unblock request has been declined due to your history of vandalism and/or disruption to this encyclopedia. However, we are willing to give you another chance provided that you can earn back the trust of the Wikipedia community. To be unblocked you need to demonstrate that you are willing and able to contribute positively to Wikipedia. You can do this by:

Familiarizing yourself with our basic rules.
Read our guide to improving articles
Pick any pre-existing article you wish to improve.
If you have trouble choosing an article to improve, see this index of articles needing improvement for ideas. Once you have decided on the article you will propose improvements to:
1. Click the Edit tab at the top of that article;
2. Copy the portion of the prose from that article that you will be proposing changes to. However:
  - do not copy the "infobox" from the start of the article (i.e., markup like this: {{infobox name|...}});
  - do not copy any image placement code (i.e., markup like this: [[File:Name.jpg|thumb|caption]]);
  - do not copy the page's categories from the bottom of the page (i.e., markup like this: [[Category:Name]]);
  - do not copy the stub tag (if there) from the bottom of the page (i.e., markup like this: {{Foo stub}});
3. Click edit at your talk page, and paste at the bottom under a new section header (like this: == [[Article title]] ==) the copied content but do not save yet;
4. Place your cursor in the edit summary box and paste there an edit summary in the following form which specifies the name of the article you copied from and links to it (this is required for mandatory copyright attribution): "Copied content from [[exact Name of Article]]; see that article's history for attribution."
5. You can now save the page. However, if your edits will include citations to reliable sources (which they should), add the following template to the end of your prose: {{reflist-talk}}. Once you have added the template, click Publish changes.
Now, edit that content. Propose significant and well researched improvements by editing the selected portion of the article. Please note that we are not looking for basic typo corrections, or small unreferenced additions; your edits should be substantial, and reflect relevant policies.
When you are done with your work, re-request unblocking and an administrator will review your proposed edits.
- If we (including the original blocking admin) are convinced that your proposed edits will improve Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, you will be unblocked.

If you need help while working with your proposed edits, you may add "{{Help me|your question here ~~~~}}" to your talk page. Thank you. Yamla (talk) 11:52, 28 June 2019 (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 don't know how can I follow that path because I can't see the code. I'm blocked forever and I'm so depressed:( LuxDavid (talk) 15:12, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I was blocked permanently 3 years ago, I was younger and also more stupid. I regret the damage I did. I would like to be unblocked, I'm different. I promise that I will NOT vandalise ANYTHING. Please. I'm different. Also, I was blocked because a friend of mine got angry with me and started to fill my user page with stupid things, I overreacted and he contacted an admin in order to block me. LuxDavid (talk) 13:43, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Request withdrawn. 331dot (talk) 17:40, 4 December 2022 (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.

Just to be clear, you are refusing the path offered you toward being unblocked? --Yamla (talk) 14:18, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For future reviewers, checkuser data shows no evidence of recent block evasion. --Yamla (talk) 14:19, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The reason why I want to be unblocked is because I am now contributing to the spanish Wikipedia, and I want to translate articles, but I can't even see the code because I'm blocked. LuxDavid (talk) 14:46, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Again, are you refusing the path offered you toward being unblocked? Yes or no, please. --Yamla (talk) 14:47, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What path?? LuxDavid (talk) 14:48, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The one I offered you above on 28 June 2019. --Yamla (talk) 14:48, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, true, I didn't even remember that I had requested 3 years ago to be unblocked. The bad thing is that there is so much code inolved:( I love writing, but coding... LuxDavid (talk) 14:52, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so the only way I have to be unblocked is to follow that path? LuxDavid (talk) 15:06, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Given your earlier behaviour, it's unlikely but not impossible for you to be unblocked, if you refuse that path. --Yamla (talk) 16:25, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how to improve the english Wikipedia. I'm spanish. I've edited and even created several articles in the spanish Wikipedia, I just want to be unblocked to be able to translate articles. And I did the vandalism a long time ago, when I was a stupid younger person LuxDavid (talk) 16:54, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at one of the articles you created at eswiki, es:Asai_Chu.

It appears to have been copied word-for-word from the linked reference https://hmong.es/wiki/Asai_Ch%C5%AB . Further reading on this topic: WP:COPYVIO
It appears to have been sourced from another wiki, possibly from wikipedia itself without attribution. Further reading on this topic: WP:COPYWITHIN
I don't know about eswiki, but on enwiki, using another wiki as a reference wouldn't be acceptable. Further reading on this topic: WP:RS

You state yourself "I don't know how to improve the english Wikipedia.".

I'm don't think it would be in our best interests at this time to unblock you. I will leave this request open for another administrator in case I'm being too harsh here. SQL ^{Query Me!} 17:16, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(redacted). It's not fair LuxDavid (talk) 17:03, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For your protection, do not post personal information about yourself in this very public forum. The Spanish Wikipedia has different editors and policies than the English Wikipedia; what is acceptable there is not necessarily acceptable here. You will need to demonstrate at least a basic understanding of policies here in order to be unblocked. People certainly can change after three and a half years, but we still need to see that. 331dot (talk) 17:06, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How can I demonstrate that? LuxDavid (talk) 17:12, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We've literally told you how you can demonstrate that. So far you have refused. --Yamla (talk) 17:25, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I accept my defeat. I lose this battle, but not the war. I'll come more prepared. Maybe in 1 or 2 months, or in some years. If only could I erase my user... LuxDavid (talk) 17:28, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We're not in battle with you; we want to see your understanding of at least basic policies. You've been offered a path and have refused to take it. It is not possible to delete an account- and even if it were, the block is on you personally, not just your account, you may not edit under any account or IP address until this block is removed. So, to confirm, are you withdrawing your request to be unblocked? 331dot (talk) 17:31, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I withdraw. But I will come again in some time after following that path LuxDavid (talk) 17:38, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]