User talk:Mattsnow81/archive 1

		The Original Barnstar
		For your inumerable contributions to the list of climbers, I award you the original Barnstar! Keep up the good work! Cj005257 (talk) 11:48, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Copyright

Just to let you know I responded to your question on my talk page --David Edgar (talk) 15:41, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mattsnow81. You have new messages at Ww2censor's talk page.
Message added 17:20, 22 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

See also

Hi Mattaidepikiw. Just to let you know that I have undone your addition of the See also sections to a number of climbers' pages. These are not really needed (should every mountain have "See also List of mountains"; every flower, "See also list of flowers" etc? That would be most unusual.). The categories at the bottom give the reader a link to various "lists" of climbers, eg Category:Swiss mountain climbers. Good work on the List of climbers, alpinists and mountaineers, however. Ericoides (talk) 09:37, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Great, thanks for your message. One thing about the List of climbers that might be worth bearing in mind as you do your enormous clean-up: it might be a good idea to take out the X, Y and Z in phrases like "Joe Bloggs climbed Mount Whatever with X, Y and Z." I made this point on the Talk page a couple of years ago, but we still have lots of them. One of our primary aims is brevity, and these additional climbers add length to the quick summaries. In exceptional circumstances – Hillary and Tenzing, say – they might be OK, but we don't want "First ascent Dhaulagiri (1960) with Diener, Forrer, Schelbert, Nyima Dorji & Nawang Dorji" under Diemberger, for example. Ericoides (talk) 11:21, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

One-line summaries are an excellent idea. Photos? The ones that are already on the respective climbers' Wiki page are out of copyright (hopefully!) I've added some to the List as an example (just copy the code and change the image and climber name), under R, S and T. My advice would be to try and vary the sex, time period and nationality of whom you choose under each letter (this wholly depends, of course, on what is available); under T the only two I could find (have you got navigation popups? It's a v. quick way of seeing whether an article has a photo: just hover the mouse over the blue article link and it should pop up) were British men with facial hair ... Under S I found a more varied selection. I've selected 100px for the size so that we can have a lot of images on the right-hand margin. Insert them just above the letter name for each letter, as I have done for R, S and T. That way it looks tidy. Also try and list them vertically downwards in AZ order. Let me know if you have any probs. Cheers, Ericoides (talk) 07:24, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Two other minor things worth mentioning. 1: If you have a choice between two pictures, the one where the person in question is looking leftwards – ie into, as opposed to out of, the article – is more aesthetically pleasing. 2: Because you'll be adding the photos above the letter name so that the first one aligns with the section break, when you edit a section you do it in the letter above (ie, edit "S" photos at the foot of "R"). Ericoides (talk) 07:31, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

I've just tweaked "T". Some desirable things (IMO). First ascent of Mount Whatever → First ascent Mount Whatever (+ wikilink every mountain); First woman to summit Mount Whatever → First female ascent Mount Whatever; North Face → north face (also west, ridge etc etc). No need to have date of death in the text either, as it's given in the date span. Anything to make the entries shorter; then impose the style consistently across the List. (Later: I couldn't help myself adding a few more; but I've left quite a few empty letters for you. Best, perhaps, to use images of the leading figures (Mallory, Hillary, Hill, Ondra etc. Sorry for nicking your idea! I've also relentlessly pruned quite a few entries.) Ericoides (talk) 07:55, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Just a note; I removed the superscript and changed North Face etc to north face etc. Don't you think that both of these are an improvement? To my mind, 1^st looks unnecessarily fussy (and is rarely, if ever, used on Wiki) and North Face is an overuse of caps. Ericoides (talk) 20:09, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Ah, we are cross-purposes. I meant change 1^st to 1st. But now you mention it, first ascent should always be spelled out in full as "first ascent", not "1st ascent". But when we have a phrase like "8th person to climb Mount Whatever", I think we should have 8th rather than 8^th person, which looks eccentric and quite ugly. In formal letters written in copperplate script it's fine, almost de rigueur, but in ordinary text, I think not... Ericoides (talk) 20:47, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, just seen your question. I was once, but have now stopped. I posted a few pics here. I now restrict myself to Munro bagging in winter. Ericoides (talk) 20:57, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

That was the track on the other side from the way I went up; I think the ascent would be very steep from [this side. Yes, you need that equipment in snow. Anyway, cela suffit, quite enough about me; we have an encyclopedia to write. Ericoides (talk) 21:47, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mattsnow81. You have new messages at Cj005257's talk page.
Message added 20:59, 17 February 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

List of climbers, alpinists and mountaineers

I guess I could add some famous climbers from Poland. BambelB (talk) 13:34, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

April 2011

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Heaven's Gate (religious group), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 14:11, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

August 2011

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize any other Wikipedia page, as you did to Bendera Pusaka, you will be blocked from editing. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 08:03, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

(see any edit of 17 August) Materialscientist (talk) 08:13, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

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).

Mattsnow81 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I'm a nice guy who edited the wiki productively in the past and has fallen into hard times emotionally. Please unban me. I will not edit to my past capabilities (when I edited like 4 hours a day) but still can be of some help, correcting a typo here or an unsound grammar move there while I go about my casual reading of this great site. I have no doubts that there are no clouds on the horizon, as alcohol fueled my vandalism binge, and I drink very casually. And I once was awarded with the barnstar, as you can see on top of my userpage. Please. Mattaidepikiw (talk) 08:43, 17 August 2011 (UTC) I was drunk! What is that therapy thing? I won't do it again, that's all. Mattaidepikiw (talk) 09:22, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Wikipedia is WP:NOTTHERAPY, and there is never an excuse for vandalism, see WP:EBUR. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:51, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

---

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).

Mattsnow81 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

That was my first block ever and I was drunk. Please be merciful! I collaborated a lot to climbing articles in the past. Mattaidepikiw (talk) 04:38, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Your edits that led to your block occurred between 7:52UTC and 8:09UTC. Your request for unblock came at 8:43UTC. You sobered up in those 35 minutes to make a request for unblock? I'm not buying it. Your actions were completely inappropriate regardless of your state of mind. either way (talk) 12:55, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

---

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).

Mattsnow81 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have been banned for some vandalism I did while under the influence of alcohol, and I am now sober, and it was a slip-up as any human being could experience. I am not an alcoholic at all, rather I'm just being honest about what happened. I understand Wikipedia is not a place for therapy as was underlined to me earlier, nor did I thought it was. It seems to me that banning a user permanently for his first offense is quite a bit abusive, especially since I had a good history before, as you can see above, I have been awarded the Barnstar from an appreciative user. I have been a productive person on the wiki before and I am sure I am worthy of a second chance, since my ban has prevented me from editing for more than a week. I get it. The lesson is there. I won't do it again. It was the first time I was banned, I intend on sporting a good behavior, and I think a permaban for a first ban is really abusive. I can assure you that I will be a productive Wikipedia citizen, please give me my second chance, as I agree another shameful transgression (as I admit I did, not knowing the consequences) would be sufficient grounds to ban me permanently Mattaidepikiw (talk) 02:50, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I've reviewed your contributions, and you also vandalised the Heaven's Gate (religious group) article in April: [1], [2], [3], so this wasn't a "first offense" you've claimed in this unblock request. On the other hand, most of your other contributions seem OK. To be unblocked you're going to need to own up to whatever the full extent of your past vandalism is and explain how you will avoid it in the future. Please note that your vandalism on 17 August and the vandalism in April is towards the more severe end of the scale, so you need to provide strong assurances that there is no further risk of vandalism if you are unblocked. If you have personal issues reviewing admins don't need to know the details or how you are managing them, we just need to feel confident that you won't disrupt Wikipedia again. Nick-D (talk) 11:43, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

---

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).

Mattsnow81 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Could you please unban me so I can go edit and write according to the Wikipedia standards? I made a mistake and I never suspected I would be infinibanned on the first ban. It's been more than a month now and I understand the lesson and I will never be disruptive again. I liked to edit climbing related articles, the Barnstar awarded to me at the beginning of this talk page is a proof of that. I really don't know how I could put it more convincingly: I will never vandalize again and I will make good edits. I had my punishment, I get it. If I ever vandalize again, you can infiniban me, but I know it is not going to happen, because I just won't vandalize the website one single time in the future. Mattaidepikiw (talk) 10:45, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Nope. You need to answer the questions posed by Nick-D, above, when he declined your unblock request on 29 August. You don't need to use the unblock template, just post a response below. On the merits, I think that an indefinite block might be a bit much, but note that an indefinite block is not an infinite block - if you can satisfy admins that you're willing to edit productively, I don't see any issue with unblocking. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 12:20, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

---

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 accepted the request.

Mattsnow81 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

To the person reviewing this. I would like to apologize for my horrible edits I made over 2 months ago. As I have stated in the previous appeals (feel free to take a read), I intend on being a productive member of the community, which I was before perpetrating some offenses and being foolish enough not to heed the warnings. I was warned but not banned, which leads me to believe that the escalation of disciplanary measures (from a formal warning to infiniban) is a little stiff to say the least. A lot has happened since that time on a personal level (for the better) and the reason why I would really like to be able to edit again is that I would like to contribute to cycling and climbing related articles, as well as correcting some grammar mistakes I stumbled upon, to the best of my abilities. I don't know how else I could put it in a more convincing and honest manner: I will NEVER vandalize this site again which I consult so much. You can also run a usercheck or whatever it is called to see that I never edited under an IP cloak during my whole ban. Please consider my earlier edits.(receiving the Barnstar from another user for a thorough cleaning of the list of climbers article was greatly appreciated) Also consider the length of time I was banned and my commitment to the effect that I will never vandalize again and that I will be a productive member. Thanks! Mattaidepikiw (talk) 05:53, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Accept reason:

I have blocked Mattaidepikiw and lifted my block after reading this page. Good luck with productive editing. Keep in mind that your past edits are visible, and thus your next edits might be overly scrutinized. Using edit summaries and avoiding controversial edits might help. Materialscientist (talk) 00:14, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Do you understand the difference between a WP:BLOCK and a WP:BAN? You're currently indefinitely blocked, which is not the same as infinitely. It means (if you have read) that you're blocked until the community is convinced that a) you understand the reasons behind the block, and b) that you're not likely to repeat the behaviours that led to the block. From what I see, you're meeting both a and b, but I wanted to be clear about the difference between a ban and a block ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:01, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

I have reviewed this situation as well, and like Bwilkins, I think this may be a "lesson learned" situation. I would like to hear from the blocking admin before unblocking, however. But as an admin myself, I would feel safe unblocking with the understanding that this user is on a short leash. --Jayron32 18:32, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you guys, yes in fact it clearly is a case of "lesson learned". Keep me on the radar, I assure you my edits will not be disruptive ever again. Mattaidepikiw (talk) 21:20, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

After a quick glance over things, I concur with Bwilkins and Jayron32. Might as well give Mattaidepikiw one last chance. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:35, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Mattaidepikiw (talk) 00:51, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Climbing specialist

With regards to my removal of the list of climbers at climbing specialist, I did this because the list is independent research. Essentially, they might be "great" climbers, but it's not for you or I or any other Wikipedia editor to say. On the other hand, if someone has put together a "top 20 climbers of all time" or something similar in a magazine or book, for example, it would be fine to include information about that. Severo^TC 20:40, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

OK, I get your point. Mattaidepikiw (talk) 01:31, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

Replied

Hello, Mattsnow81. You have new messages at Silver seren's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Replied again. Silverseren^C 08:57, 10 March 2012 (UTC)