User talk:NicholasHui/Archive 2015–2021

Archive 2022–present →

July 2015

Hello, I'm Serols. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Kevin Bieksa— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Serols (talk) 15:33, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Kevin Bieksa with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Serols (talk) 15:47, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Kevin Bieksa with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. Serols (talk) 15:48, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello, NicholasHui, and welcome to Wikipedia!

An edit that you recently made seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox.

Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or type {{Help me}} on your talk page here, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Deadman137 (talk) 01:29, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 2015

Hello, I'm Walter Görlitz. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Port Mann Bridge, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:20, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Windows on the World. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. David J Johnson (talk) 00:08, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to 2015–16 Montreal Canadiens season. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 2602:306:3357:BA0:B1F0:2749:589C:B231 (talk) 18:15, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at 2015–16 Montreal Canadiens season. 2602:306:3357:BA0:B1F0:2749:589C:B231 (talk) 18:25, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at 2016 Stanley Cup playoffs. Deadman137 (talk) 07:10, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

November 2016

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Rudolf Schmundt, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Dr. K. 04:44, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at 2016–17 Toronto Maple Leafs season. – Sabbatino (talk) 11:51, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm RedPanda25. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Pitt River Bridge, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Red Panda 25 21:12, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

January 2017

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to American Airlines Flight 11. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. David J Johnson (talk) 21:39, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to List of members of the 20 July plot, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. User:HopsonRoad 15:03, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistent vandalism. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock 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 ~~~~}}. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 00:36, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to 2017–18 Winnipeg Jets season. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. – Sabbatino (talk) 11:00, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I (Nicholas Hui) wasn't the person who messed up 2017-18 Winnipeg Jets Season. I was only trying to fix it when I saw the article messed up on some part of the section.

NHL regular season schedule

Thanks for creating NHL regular season schedule tables. However, I want to just point out that the opposing teams are usually linked to the appropriate season pages. For example, instead of just listing "Anaheim" we link it to Anaheim. – Sabbatino (talk) 06:47, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to thank you for the information. I am still learning how I can do better to edit in the correct way. But thanks for your understanding. – Portmannfire (talk) 10:00, 3 July 2018 (PT)

October 2018

Hello, I'm HickoryOughtShirt?4. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to 2018–19 Toronto Maple Leafs season 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. Thanks. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 23:34, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@HickoryOughtShirt?4: When you told me about the Toronto Maple Leafs Player Statistics I made by putting Montreal Canadiens player statistics instead. I was editing Montreal Canadiens statistics as well and that was how it happened NicholasHui (talk) 05:27, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@NicholasHui: Ah, that makes sense. I do that too sometimes if I'm just copying statistics charts, no biggie. I apologize for being so quick-fingered on Twinkle. I'm sure you know you can remove my twinkle template if you want. I appreciate all the work you did today on the 2018–19 season pages, I know it was probably a tedious job. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 05:33, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NHL team season pages

Hello Portmannfire,

I greatly appreciate your contributions to various NHL team's season pages, as it has saved me a lot of time. However, I have noticed that some areas in the regular season game log are missing, or done incorrectly. For example, the "attendance" figure under the game log is left blank. The attendance can be found by clicking "Game Center" on NHL.com for any regular season game, scroll down until you see "Preview", scroll down, and click on "Game Summary". From there, you will be brought to a page that shows every statistic from that regular season game. Another thing that I've noticed, is that the recap links are done incorrectly. There is a correct way of linking the recap, and an incorrect method. Below are examples of the correct and incorrect ways of linking the game recaps.

Incorrect: https://www.nhl.com/gamecenter/fla-vs-nyi/2018/10/24/2018020130#game=2018020130,game_state=preview,lock_state=preview Recap

Correct: https://www.nhl.com/gamecenter/fla-vs-nyi/2018/10/24/2018020130 Recap

There is just some unnecessary text in the incorrect method. I don't mean to criticize your editing by any means, these are just a couple suggestions that I hope can help you out with editing in the future. Yowashi (talk) 04:17, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have given you specific instructions on how to edit NHL team season pages correctly, and yet you are still doing it incorrectly. Please read the message that I posted above for you! – Yowashi (talk) 06:10, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestion. I'll take that into account the next time I edit.

2018–19 Vancouver Canucks season

Hey there. Just a quick note to let you know that player statistics are to be sorted in order of most points. Your edits to the Canucks' player stats have been removing the ordering by most points, and putting the players into a random order. Thanks! – Nurmsook! ^talk... 22:27, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey again. That's for the note about the ordering of stats. Again though, the WP:CONSENSUS here has been to order player statistics in order of points, highest to lowest. One thing to keep in mind when you're ordering by how they are showing in game recaps is that not every player plays each game, so really there is no consistency game-to-game. Wikipedia is based on consensus and the consensus has been for many, many years to order player stats by points, not by NHL game recap. Please refrain from re-ordering in that way. Many thanks. – Nurmsook! ^talk... 17:00, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nurmsook is right. The first player to be listed in the statistics' table is the player with the most points. If two or more players have the same amount of points then the player with more goals is listed above. The same applies when players have the same amount of points and goals – the player with more assists is listed above. This is the standard practice at WP:NHL and that is also the standard for ice hockey leagues when they list their statistics (NHL, KHL and others). For example, in here players are listed in some random order, while in here the order is correct. – Sabbatino (talk) 07:38, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why should I have to listen to you when you haven't even done anything that I have asked you to do? Also, stop notifying me for every error I make.

"Players statistics" format

Please stop doing this and this. First of all, you are messing up the teams' colors and secondly, that is not needed until we know if the team has qualified for the playoffs. I am trying to standardize the teams' pages and then do a guide (per this discussion), but it is hard to do it when you or other users do whatever they feel like. – Sabbatino (talk) 07:25, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop edit warring, which you have been doing for some time by restoring to your preferred version. It seems that you ignored what was written to you and immediately restored to your preferred version at 2018–19 Montreal Canadiens season. – Sabbatino (talk) 07:42, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Editing NHL Team pages

Hi Portmannfire, I have asked another person to help me out with the editing, since it gets pretty hectic on days where there are so many games scheduled for one day. You can help out with the editing as well. It's just that I like to get the editing done immediately, that way I'm not staying up until almost 12 AM editing. I hope this answered your question. Yowashi (talk) 07:09, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cease editing NHL team pages

Hi Portmannfire. I have noticed your recent edits on both the New Jersey Devils and Tampa Bay Lightning pages, and I have noticed that you are struggling on adding the recaps. I have notified you numerous times on how to add the recap properly, but you seem to ignore my messages. I am suggesting you to stop editing the NHL pages until you can learn how to add the recap properly. I have posted the correct method of adding the recap in an earlier message. Us users appreciate your contributions. However, you are not doing us any justice when you're editing things incorrectly. Please take this message into account. Yowashi (talk) 02:58, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

This message was not only unnecessary, but it was incorrect seeing as how I'm the one who forgot to change the URL when copying the reference from the previous game. I think it would be wise for you apologize to Magnus221, and in the future perhaps consider just fixing a mistake and moving on without making a comment. Tampabay721 (talk) 03:57, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello NicholasHui, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Ariel Castro kidnappings have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:27, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion you started at ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. You recently posted about an editor at the Admin's Noticeboard for Incidents. I recommend you return to the thread and familiarize yourself with its developments, as they concern your continued conduct as well. Please remember to be civil if you do choose to engage at the noticeboard. -- Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!} 07:58, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 @NinjaRobotPirate:, This user GoodDay was trying to undo the player stats that were not necessary to revert and did revert because I should be in a discussion page. I warned this user several times not to do it but did not listened to me. Also, GoodDay complains that I am messing the players rankings even though I had put it to most points to least not long ago. And it matches to the official team stat source. Look at View history of those NHL teams so that you can find out the information where it comes from. NicholasHui (talk) 18:14, 28 February 2019 (UTC)}}

. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:09, 28 February 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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here @NinjaRobotPirate:, This user GoodDay was trying to undo the player stats that were not necessary to revert and did revert because I should be in a discussion page. I warned this user several times not to do it but did not listened to me. Also, GoodDay complains that I am messing the players rankings even though I had put it to most points to least not long ago. And it matches to the official team stat source. Look at View history of those NHL teams so that you can find out the information where it comes from. NicholasHui (talk) 18:14, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Talk about your actions, not those of other people. Please see WP:GAB to understand how to craft an unblock request. Thanks! Yamla (talk) 18:55, 28 February 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.

Socking, edit-warring and original research

With regards to this ANI thread and review of your recent edits, it is clear that:

you have been violating wikipedia's WP:SOCK policy by logging out to continue edit-warring on multiple pages;
and violating wikipedia's verifiability and no original research policies by adding/updating information to hockey-related article that is not backed up by published sources

If you wish to discuss the issue of when player statistics should be updated and what sources can be used for the purpose, you should do so at WT:HOCKEY and establish consensus that is compliant with wikipedia's content policies. Trying to get your way through edit-warring will only lead to lengthier blocks. Abecedare (talk) 21:23, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NHL statistics source

I just saw this edit by you and just want to inform that statistics should be taken from here (NHL.com) instead of here, because teams tend to use some kind of different calculations. The 3.41 GAA is from here, while the Oilers list 3.43 GAA. – Sabbatino (talk) 08:45, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your conduct at ANI

Howdy hello! While I understand that being discussed at ANI is not fun, please do not delete discussions per the talk page guidelines. Remember, blanking sections does not delete those edits. Only admins can forever delete edits. Instead of trying to halt discussion (which is only more likely to get you blocked), engage in meaningful discussion and work to understand our policies. Thank you! Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:01, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see Oshwah already let you know about policy, my bad for double messaging. Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:04, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 60 hours for disruptive editing of hockey stats without established consensus on when to update and with which sources.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. —Bagumba (talk) 04:42, 19 March 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).

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

Request reason:

'My edits to getting for NHL Canadian Teams comes from the recap games as I add the information on to the stats on wikipedia. I had seen another IP User that updates the Ottawa Senators 2018-19 season page does it immediately after the game is finalized

Decline reason:

Given the current ANI discussion that's open (permalink) regarding your long-term and repeated issues with NHL / hockey-related articles, and the participation, input, and the proposal that it has generated, I don't find your unblock request as one that's in-line with what the community would want to see before an unblock is considered. You appear to argue that your edits were justified and fine, and you argue that it's fine because you saw somebody else doing it to an unrelated article - that reasoning is not a valid. You need to take the time to review the ANI discussion and the responses generated, as well as the numerous messages, warnings, notes, and pings you've received by other users asking you to stop and to participate in discussion so that things can be worked out. Your unblock request here does not show me that you've done so, nor does it show me that you understand the reason behind the block. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:42, 19 March 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.

Nicholas, I reminded you of the note I had left on your talkpage (following the previous ANI thread about your conduct), which said If you wish to discuss the issue of when player statistics should be updated and what sources can be used for the purpose, you should do so at WT:HOCKEY and establish consensus that is compliant with wikipedia's content policies. Trying to get your way through edit-warring will only lead to lengthier blocks. If that's not clear enough, please ask/discuss. We cannot just keep repeating this cycle of disruptive editing. Abecedare (talk) 08:22, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NHL Stats official website

This is an information as my reminder from Yowashi from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey that was posted. this website

March 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for resuming the problematic editing immediately after your previous block expired. This block need not be forever, but we'll need to wait until at least the ANI discussion regarding your topic-ban is resolved.

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='I acknowledge to have rushed a bit too quickly on editing on NHL Canadian Teams because I saw the team stats from the game they played and added them on the team stats instead of waiting for the team official stats to be updated. I do admit that I made some errors for the Calgary Flames stats because I did not double check my work and that I did not listen to other user's advice saying that I could be prone to errors even if my strategy was an advantage. For GAA Average for Winnipeg Jets, I knew my calculations were off and I had to check my work on the Winnipeg Jets team official stats. So I did check some work on the Team official stat source.}}

Abecedare (talk) 05:22, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

I acknowledge to have rushed a bit too quickly on editing on NHL Canadian Teams because I saw the team stats from the game they played and added them on the team stats instead of waiting for the team official stats to be updated. I do admit that I made some errors for the Calgary Flames stats because I did not double check my work and that I did not listen to other user's advice saying that I could be prone to errors even if my strategy was an advantage. For GAA Average for Winnipeg Jets, I knew my calculations were off and I had to check my work on the Winnipeg Jets team official stats. So I did check some work on the Team official stat source. In addition, I now have enlisted a mentor who is a Wikipedia editor with more than 10 years of experience and thousands of unreverted edits. If my account is unblocked, I will do the following: * For the next while (months), I will only do edits with my mentor together. * For the next while (months), I will refrain from editing hockey pages until I get better at editing Wikipedia pages and acquire a better understanding of Wikipedia procedures and etiquette. I would like to thank everyone for their patience in their interactions with me, and I am sorry for the mistakes I have made. This note is composed together with my mentor. Of course, you can not be certain of the existence of a "mentor" or the above promises, but I think you can see that the word usage, style, tone, etc. are different from what you have seen before from my account, and of course you can block my account again if disruptive editing on hockey pages happens again. NicholasHui (talk) 23:18, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Accept reason:

See discussion below. Abecedare (talk) 08:42, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See also this additional note I posted at ANI. Abecedare (talk) 05:28, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@NicholasHui: You did not follow the unblock instructions written above to "add the following text below the block notice on your talk page." You can refer to the IP's edit to fix your previous request, which you claimed was you editing logged out. Another editor also had fixed the unblock request from your 1st block, which you can also refer to.—Bagumba (talk) 08:24, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bagumba (talk): Were you thinking that I claimed to be the other IP user? No, I definitely was not that IP User.

NicholasHui (talk) 15:52, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note to proceesing admin Please also be aware of related open thread Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed_topic_ban, and consider closing that in conjunction with this request.—Bagumba (talk) 07:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Abecedare: The user has offered unblock conditions. As the reviewing administrator, I will delegate my decision to you: if the user's unblock request has satisfied the conditions that you are looking for, feel free to unblock without further ado. If the unblock request does not satisfy the conditions you are looking for, feel free to decline on my behalf (as I would decline on such a recommendation anyway). Unless the user meets the blocking admin's unblock conditions, they are to remain blocked until the TBAN discussion is resolved. ~Swarm~ {talk} 07:27, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Swarm: To summarize the situation as I see it for you and future record. NicholasHui seems well-intentioned but there are definitely CIR/IDHT issues that compel them to repeatedly bread RS/OR policies in hockey-related articles despite being aware that their edits are both contentious and being closely watched. This has resulted in

A late-Feb ANI thread and edit-warring complaint that resulted in a short 3RR block by NinjaRobotPirate and this warning by me
After the block expired the problematic editing resumed, resulting in a new ANI thread and topic-ban proposal. Bagumba closed the former with another short block.
After that block expired the problematic editing resumed immediately, resulting in my "indef" block.

To add to the bizareness:

I cannot reconcile statements by Nicholas claiming to be and not to be an IP editor.
The whole secret-mentor affair.

(TL;DR) here is my proposal: We accept Nicholas's offer to "refrain from editing hockey pages" but formalize it by closing the ANI topic-ban discussion with a "Topic ban all hockey-related articles and discussions; appealable at WP:AN in 12 months" and a clear understanding that any violation of the topic-ban or socking/logged-out editing will result in the indef block being re-imposed. If that sounds reasonable to yawl, I can put in the paperwork. Abecedare (talk) 08:00, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Abecedare: The TBAN proposal at ANI was "topic banned from updating sports statistics in articles ..." Since stats in all sports are conceptually the same, there is no current reason to believe that their editing in other sports would be any better. I'd suggest not limiting this to hockey stats, but sports stats in general as per the original community discussion.—Bagumba (talk) 08:13, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Abecedare: Looks good. Don't forget to log at WP:EDRC. ~Swarm~ {talk} 08:51, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Swarm: Great! I was looking for the correct place to log the topic-ban. All done (I hope!). Abecedare (talk) 08:59, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of topic-ban

Following community-discussion at ANI you have been topic banned from updating sports statistics in articles. You may appeal the topic-ban at WP:AN but no sooner than March 25, 2020. Lifting of the topic ban will be contingent on your edits and behavior showing that they fully understand WP:V and WP:OR.

Abecedare (talk) 08:40, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

Hello, I'm SounderBruce. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, University Bridge (Seattle), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please do not disruptively edit across multiple pages. Sounder Bruce 04:07, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please fix your dates

I've noticed you've added a lot of exact dates to articles. While some aren't needed, you should at least change "In MONTH" to "On DATE" to follow proper English rules. Please take more precautions before mass-editing pages. Sounder Bruce 23:16, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And average ridership totals should remain with the months alone, as they are being compiled for the months, not just for that date. Again, please take time before making your edits. Sounder Bruce 23:18, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please use the citation templates (like {{cite news}}) instead of posting bare URLs as references. Also, Van City Buzz is a blog and thus not a reliable source. Sounder Bruce 00:57, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

Hello, I'm SounderBruce. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, University Bridge (Seattle), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please use citation templates and pick your sources carefully. And again, we don't need specific dates for every single event; a month is fine for something minor. Sounder Bruce 05:13, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of things

I'm not sure why you restored content that another editor removed from their own talk page; with few exceptions editors are allowed to blank their pages (see WP:BLANKING). Also, please ensure you include reliable sources when adding content to articles, especially biographies. Your edit to Davy Spillane was made contrary to WP:DOB.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:56, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Page moves

Please do not move pages without also sweeping up the mess that is left behind. Also, please conform to existing article naming standards. These RapidBus lines should follow R4 RapidBus rather than adding the redundant street name. Sounder Bruce 04:59, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User Contributions Notice

Just to know I also was in other contributions sources for 24.86.100.134 (talk): June 26, 2015 to August 3, 2017 (2012 edits)

Nicholas Hui (talk): August 7, 2015 to September 12, 2015

- 24.84.72.45 (talk): October 28, 2015 to May 9, 2016 The contribtuions that I wrote were mainly NHL Hockey Teams, Mike Condon (ice hockey, Atlanta Thrashers) (41 edits)

- 96.49.249.18 (talk): September 7, 2016 to October 10, 2017 The contributions that I mainly contributed are NHL articles, World War II stuff (exception of it was German submarine U-31 (S181), American Flights 11, Spiderman 2, Nate Saint, Pete Fleming, Ed McCully, Port Mann Bridge, Infrastructure of Greater Vancouver

- 69.50.165.209 (talk): October 12, 2016

- 208.110.114.132 (talk): May 16, 2017 to June 20, 2017 The contributions I did are Marsh & McLennan Companies, Tacoma Narrows Bridge, Evergreen Line Extension, Washington State Route 16, Warsaw Ghetto Uprising ‎

- 24.84.236.156 (talk) September 17, 2017 to November 15, 2017

- 24.84.255.48 (talk) August 9, 2017 to November 27, 2017

- 24.85.101.130 (talk) October 11, 2017 to June 14, 2018 (The contributions I mainly did are NHL Articles and British Columbia Highway 91) (44 edits)

- 204.191.179.162 (talk) November 17, 2017 to April 4, 2018 The Contributions I did are NHL Hockey Articles

- 208.110.114.246 (talk) November 15, December 21, 2017 (Some contributions are shared by another IP User I did not edit through these information are Salvador Dali.)

- 24.84.228.210 (talk) November 28, 2017 to present (558 edits) as my current IP address logout

- 67.224.87.107 (talk)

- 208.181.190.98 (talk) April 21, 2018 (Contibutions I did was 2017-18 Winnipeg Jets season playoffs)

- 184.68.147.250 (talk) April 20, 2018

- Portmannfire (talk) April to December 2018.

April 2020

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for breaching of your topic-ban duing and after your unsuccessful appeal, editing while logged out, and bizarre disruptive editing even though your previous indef block for similar issues was lifted after assurances that such problematic actions will not reoccur.

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 ~~~~}}. Abecedare (talk) 14:30, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: You may still have a path back on wikipedia under the standard offer after, say, six months but if your persist in violating the topic-ban or evading the block by editing while logged out, any such chance will disappear. Abecedare (talk) 14:33, 24 April 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

I have read the Wikipedia guide to appealing blocks, and the following are my reasons for appealing my block. 0. I admit that some of my edits on Wikipedia before April 2020 were wrong.

1. It is my nature that it takes me more time to learn lessons, especially regarding social cues and rules. I feel that I have finally learned my lesson, enough that I will not be disruptive on Wikipedia and make a positive contribution.

2. I have been advised by an experienced Wikipedia editor that sports pages are difficult to edit, especially time-sensitive information. I will refrain from editing sports pages even if I am unblocked. I have other interests where I can contribute to Wikipedia.

3. I have also been advised that I should refrain from engaging other Wikipedia editors on their talk pages, unless it has to do with Wikipedia editing. Other Wikipedia editors are not necessarily my friends (therefore, no idle chitchats). This may seem obvious but it took me a while to learn.

4. Since the end of July 2020 I have made contributions to simple.wikipedia.org; since the end of October 2020 I only edited non-sports pages on that WMF site.

Thank you for your consideration. -- NicholasHui (talk) 20:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. 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
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 15:03, 31 January 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

I have read again the guide to appealing blocks, as I did before my first appeal.

I understand that I have been blocked for bizarre and disruptive editing.
I now understand the rules and norms for Wikipedia editing and will not engage in unacceptable behaviour.
I will make useful contributions instead. Since the end of July 2020 I have made contributions to simple.wikipedia.org; since the end of October 2020 I only edited non-sports pages on that WMF site.

-- NicholasHui (talk) 04:50, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. 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
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 05:39, 10 March 2021 (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 know you've been burned here before - but considering Simple:Special:Contributions/NicholasHui, what are your thoughts here, Abecedare?~~

~~NicholasHui, you've been unblocked, and reverted to the problematic behavior before, requiring you to be re-blocked. What assurances would we have that you wouldn't repeat this cycle?~~ SQL ^{Query me!} 00:12, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. NicholasHui, what can you tell me about the account Roger Hui? SQL ^{Query me!} 00:15, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Hui is a Wikipedia account used by another person who shares my internet connection. We are different people. NicholasHui (talk) 22:39, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

Since my previous unblock request was met with a "procedural decline", I cannot do any better than my last request:

I have read the Wikipedia guide to appealing blocks, and the following are my reasons for appealing my block.

0. I admit that some of my edits on Wikipedia before April 2020 were wrong.

1. It is my nature that it takes me more time to learn lessons, especially regarding social cues and rules. I feel that I have finally learned my lesson, enough that I will not be disruptive on Wikipedia and make a positive contribution.

2. I have been advised by an experienced Wikipedia editor that sports pages are difficult to edit, especially time-sensitive information. I will refrain from editing sports pages even if I am unblocked. I have other interests where I can contribute to Wikipedia.

3. I have also been advised that I should refrain from engaging other Wikipedia editors on their talk pages, unless it has to do with Wikipedia editing. Other Wikipedia editors are not necessarily my friends (therefore, no idle chitchats). This may seem obvious but it took me a while to learn.

4. Since the end of July 2020 I have made contributions to simple.wikipedia.org; since the end of October 2020 I only edited non-sports pages on that WMF site.

Thank you for your consideration. -- NicholasHui (talk) 23:11, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Request seems reasonable. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 13:54, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What other topics will you contribute about? 331dot (talk) 11:20, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: The other topics I will contribute if this block is lifted are Transportation Infrastructure, 9/11 during and aftermath, and the Nazi German Resistance against Adolf Hitler instead of editing Sports Articles that are difficult and time sensitive. You can see this by my contributions on simple.wikipedia.org. Thank you for your consideration. NicholasHui (talk) 23:37, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Abecedare What do you think? 331dot (talk) 00:18, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

October 2021

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Sounder Bruce 06:11, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unreliable sources

Just FYI, The Urbanist is a SPS and should not be used as a source unless absolutely necessary. Sounder Bruce 04:09, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Archive 2022–present →