User talk:Lynctekrua

Speedy deletion nomination of Localytics

I just started a new article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Localytics It is only my second one and I did not realize it is not a published draft. I just started to work on it. How do I move it to "draft" until I am ready to publish it? NancyJeanGF (talk) 14:25, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just finished the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Localytics Can I remove the tag you placed on it and publish it? Or can you remove the tag? Thank you. NancyJeanGF (talk) 15:55, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User warnings

Please stop placing user warning messages on user pages, as you did here. User warnings go on user talk pages. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:34, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Localytics article

You just commented on my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Localytics. Thank you for suggestions.

You mentioned that the second paragraph sounds like advertisement. I actually took the whole block from an article on VentureBeat: http://venturebeat.com/2013/08/07/localytics-overhauls-its-web-and-mobile-apps-analytics-platform-exclusive/ - and independent website. The intent was to list the features it offers. Do you suggest I remove the paragraph? Do you suggest I re-phrase VentureBeat wording? I thought I can not post personal opinion and can only quote third party websites. Please advise. NancyJeanGF (talk) 01:17, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, you just suggested I remove the whole paragraph. And you implied I copied the WHOLE article. I just quoted from the article the small section listing the features. If I remove it, then no features will be listed. Do you suggest I give up on quoting and re-phrase in my own language? NancyJeanGF (talk) 01:31, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @NancyJeanGF: Yes, quoting other articles without quotes and attribution is considered plagiarism at best and a copyright violation at worst. It is always best to write in your own words, citing the source as a reference but not quoting from it directly. Some exceptions to this are when you are quoting a review, or other such attributed opinions. Then the quote should be clearly marked as a quote, and properly cited. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:36, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Reflist-ontalk

Template:Reflist-ontalk has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:39, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Coastal Craft Article

Thank you for your comment on my new article, it is still a work in progress as I am trying to list facts and detail of different yachts, I will browse other listings to see how they are written to avoid being deleted. Thanks again for keeping an eye on my work Jdburgess (talk) 23:07, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AfC

We appreciate your enthusiasm, but if you cannot read the instructions on the English Wikipedia, you are probably not ready to be patrolling pages and reviewing pages at AfC. I have removed you from the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants. If you need any advice on where you can best help the encyclopedia, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:15, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed your response on Kudpung's talk page, and I think you're missing the point of that editor and the many others who have objected to most of your activity since you started using this username. Backlog or no, you don't current seem to have enough of an understanding of procedure, interaction with newer editors or cleanup/administration-type duties, and I'm not sure your judgement re: new articles for creation is sound. You can't even allow editors literally in the process of updating new articles more than a couple of minutes. Like others have suggested, perhaps you should focus on creating your own article or improving existing article content rather than getting mixed up in the new article process. You obviously have an interest in participating and it would be great to put your drive and enthusiasm into task where there can do the most good with no disruption. Thanks! — TAnthony^Talk 19:39, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Dr. Vivek Kumar Pandey"

I am amazed to discover that you accepted an draft titled "Vivek Kumar Pandey", and renamed it do Dr. Vivek Kumar Pandey. Why did you so rename it?

With the "Dr.", the article had already been deleted via AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Vivek Kumar Pandey. Without the "Dr.", it had already been deleted twice via AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vivek Kumar Pandey (2nd nomination). When closing the latter, RoySmith wrote: Given the history of recreation, I'm going to salt this title, as several participants suggested. Unfortunately it seems that he didn't also salt the title "Dr. Vivek Kumar Pandey": I have now done this myself.

Bearing in mind the above, I view the history of your user page, and a recent exchange with Kudpung, with considerable interest. I strongly suggest that you take a break of at least one month from any work that might be considered administrative; meanwhile, you are welcome to make (reliably sourced) contributions to content. -- Hoary (talk) 14:12, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since I posted the message above, you have found the time to make a great number of edits. But you haven't found time to answer my question above: When you turned a draft titled "Vivek Kumar Pandey" into an article, why did you retitle it Dr. Vivek Kumar Pandey? I look forward to your response.

Your numerous edits since my last message have included at least two administrative matters: (i) deciding that a draft was an acceptable article, and moving it to Aurore Tomé; and (ii) deciding and announcing that Draft:Skidz was not acceptable. This goes directly against the advice of Kudpung, the advice of User:TAnthony, and the advice of myself. The advice has been phrased amicably so far. This won't long continue. Please stop your involvement in AfC matters, now. -- Hoary (talk) 08:49, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response (on my talk page). I have brought the matter up on WP:AN/I. You may wish to comment there. -- Hoary (talk) 09:44, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for continuing to review AfCs as a permanent community ban from AfC is being considered. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Shii (tock) 17:36, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Lynctekrua/afch-rewrite.js/submissions.js

User:Lynctekrua/afch-rewrite.js/submissions.js, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Lynctekrua/afch-rewrite.js/submissions.js and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Lynctekrua/afch-rewrite.js/submissions.js during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:17, 26 January 2015 (UTC) Excuse me! Please stop deleting my scripts..... Under their respected creative commons licences I am able to do this.... I was attempting to make a combined AFC, Twinkle, and master admin script. I am well within my rights to do this.[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Lynctekrua. You have new messages at Lynctekrua's talk page.
Message added 23:03, 26 January 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Lynctekrua (talk) 23:03, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Lynctekrua/easyblock.js

I've nominated User:Lynctekrua/easyblock.js for deletion. You'll find the discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Lynctekrua/easyblock.js. If you'd like to contribute to the discussion (or to that in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Lynctekrua/afch-rewrite.js/submissions.js), you can do either of two things: (i) get your block lifted (you'll find instructions above on how to apply for this) and then participate like anybody else, or (ii) write a comment on this talk page of yours and ask somebody to post it there. -- Hoary (talk) 23:39, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me! Please stop deleting my scripts..... Under their respected creative commons licences I am able to do this.... I was attempting to make a combined AFC, Twinkle, and master admin script. I am well within my rights to do this.

To begin with they are not your scripts. The creative commons licensing does allow you to copy the scripts and use them as long as you give attribution. The licenses though do not give you permission to host them here on Wikipedia if the community decides they do not belong. None of the pages belong to you, they are all community pages and the community can delete any pages they want to. -- GB fan 13:29, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes when published you would give attribution. I had a look at some of your discussions, you don't seem to surrender you point of view easily. Never the less I will try. YES, I do have permission to host it here on Wikipedia, the combined script was obviously a draft, meaning the community simply is not yet qualified to judge weather its worthy of Wikipedia. I am a programmer by trade, and the idea of a combined script is something I think(I know) would work quite well. Could someone please post this on the admin board on my behalf has to end their speculation. Thanks. Lynctekrua

You are again mistaken.Wikipedia may be the encyclopedia anyone can edit, but the community decides by consensus what it will allow and also decides who it will allow to edit pages. The community does not allow you to copy and modify scripts in order to use tools whose access is limited to AfC reviewers and administrators. Masquerading as an administrator is a blockable infringement of our rules. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:02, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If I didn't know any better, I would look at these scripts and guess you were trying to crack Wikipedia and see if you could give yourselves admin rights. That is, in a very real sense, vandalism and is a really good way to get yourself blocked indefinitely. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:11, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Other account

Please state what other account you have used. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:18, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi the account was my childhood account and has since been lost. ~Thanks. Lynctekrua

By "lost" do you mean that you don't remember what the account's name was? The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:52, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Topic ban

As a result of clear consensus in a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, you are indefinitely banned from any involvement in the "Articles for Creation" process. Unless and until a community discussion at some time in the future results in a decision to lift this ban, you may not make any edits at all relating to the "Articles for Creation" process. This includes, but is not restricted to, reviewing draft articles, making edits to draft articles, commenting on draft articles, and moving draft articles. It applies whether or not such draft articles are submitted for review. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:34, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a permanent link to the discussion which led to the topic ban. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:34, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

When your block expired, your first actions were to restart your involvement in AfC (however innocuously), and to create files that any intelligent person would realize would be deleted according to the decision that closed Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Lynctekrua/easyblock.js.

I also note that you found time to create new pages while failing to provide any response to the question of JamesBWatson, above: By "lost" do you mean that you don't remember what the account's name was?

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

-- Hoary (talk) 05:04, 2 February 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).

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

Request reason:

I have done nothing wrong... I was not banned from creating scripts, You think you can permanent ban for this? I'm a programmer by trade and was debugging the template of an admin tool.... Do you have any idea how code works on wiki? you still need permissions to push commands... This was nothing but a GUI. You have abused your power Hoary. I don't care anymore.

Decline reason:

I'm not convinced that you're here to build an encyclopedia; on the other hand, I can only deduce that your recent editing is part of your repeated attempts to masquerade as an administrator, per the discussions at the relevant MfDs and per your repeated addition of a userbox indicating such status to your user page. As for your "assistance" in debugging said code, thanks but no thanks. Kinu ^t/_c 06:45, 2 February 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.

Please decide whether you (a) want to appeal, or (b) don't care any more. If the former, please strike out "I don't care anymore." If the latter, please delete "{{unblock|reason=" and "}}". Thank you.

As for your other questions, I'll be happy to answer them once you are unblocked. -- Hoary (talk) 06:01, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Another reason for you to be blocked is that you were editing at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC to physically restrict access to the Helper Script and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation ‎ in flagrant violation of your topic ban. That in itself would have been enough reason to block you indefinitely. The sum total of your editing shows that you have absolutely no intention whatever of editing collaboratively or accepting consensus, and your presence is damaging to the project. It would require a truly radical change in your approach to justify allowing you to return. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:02, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What does this do?

What are the functions of User:Lynctekrua/debug.js and User:Lynctekrua/debug101.css? Origamite^ⓣⓒ 03:36, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The .js clearly contains sysop operations, as well as blocking actions. -- Orduin ^Discuss 04:26, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They are now history. -- Hoary (talk) 04:51, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]