User talk:Sthacker21

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Joel Birch.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Joel Birch.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 03:00, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for File:Buddy Nielsen.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Buddy Nielsen.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 03:45, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for File:Ahren Stringer.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Ahren Stringer.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 03:45, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Brian Burkheiser for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brian Burkheiser is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Burkheiser until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

nearlyevil 665 07:17, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Buddy Nielsen.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Buddy Nielsen.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 06:37, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Ahren Stringer.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Ahren Stringer.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 06:46, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Kyle Pavone

The article Kyle Pavone has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unsourced non-notable musician

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jax 0677 (talk) 14:34, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stop adding unsourced stubs into mainspace or you will be blocked

What the heading says. Producing things like Joel Birch and Ahren Stringer once is bad enough. Edit-warring over it will get your editing privileges restricted in a hurry. Please read the requirements set out at WP:NARTIST and stop being disruptive. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 23:25, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

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

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Deb (talk) 08:49, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Deb (talk) 19:00, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. 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 ~~~~}}.

Deb (talk) 07:44, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021

Hello, I'm Elizium23. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, 1988, 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. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Elizium23 (talk) 00:21, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Elizium23, I believe that this user is also a sock puppet of Tevin21 ^[1](talk) 01:34, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Chip3004, what makes you think that? Elizium23 (talk) 02:03, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

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 ~~~~}}.

Deb (talk) 07:25, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Joel Birch for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joel Birch is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joel Birch until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

FMSky (talk) 12:23, 21 August 2023 (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).

Sthacker21 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

All right! You got me! I admit I made other usernames to stay under the radar. I get it, yet I didn't understand at the time the editing I have done was considered disruptive! I still feel that reverting some of my edits just because I was blocked was completely unnecessary especially when the information I provided was completely accurate, sock or no sock. I also felt at the time some of the admins were either abusing their positions or the fact that I was being trolled by other users to no avail.

Decline reason:

This demonstrates you aren't yet willing to take responsibility for your own bad actions. Blaming others for your bad actions is all but a guarantee you won't be unblocked. In any case, given your history of abuse and sockpuppetry, there's no real chance you'll be unblocked until you go at least six months with zero edits. At that point, WP:SO is available to you. You will need to demonstrate a very different approach in that unblock request. Yamla (talk) 15:56, 4 December 2023 (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).

Sthacker21 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Fine! I get it! I didn't play by your rules and I paid the price for it. Yes, I even attempted to cut corners based out of ego rather than owning up for my actions. Here I am owning up to it! Sthacker21 (talk) 04:27, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This isnt "owning up", this is saying you're owning up. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 05:05, 7 June 2024 (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.

While I think this unblock request doesn't come remotely close to addressing the long-term abuse, there's no CU evidence of recent block evasion. --Yamla (talk) 11:01, 1 June 2024 (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).

Sthacker21 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Alright, you made your point. Yeah, I didn't know exactly what constitutes as notable on certain Wikipedia pages and to some degree still don't, so maybe the administrators can show me and give me a little insight on what would qualify as notable and what would be considered a valid source these days. I admit I was playing with fire with the administrators and other editors despite the warnings and pushing some unwanted buttons so I do apologize for that. As for the sockpuppets Aadvark Slayer, Reckless Steve, and testoffate 86, yes, that was me, there I said it. Sthacker21 (talk) 00:58, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I suggest you read WP:N and WP:RS. I think you should take the standard offer and re-apply in 6 months time. Also, when you do re-apply, you should say what edits you want to make. PhilKnight (talk) 01:36, 9 June 2024 (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).

Sthacker21 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have already took that 6 month offers without block evasions or any other nonsense, as I was told by Yamla, which I have adhered to and I have already addressed the elephant in the room, i.e., the sockpuppetry and screwing around, or long term abuse, on this website. As for what PhilKnight said, yes, I would like to contribute with pages like the 2024 deaths in the United States as well as the Births in the United States from certain years and other nations as well. I would also like to make some spelling corrections and improvements for other certain pages, whether it's movies, shows, or people. I would also like to restore some pages I created that were deleted due to the G5 rule. Those pages are Rising Insane, Our Mirage, Venues, AVIANA, Engst, Kevin Ratajczak, Nico Sallach, and there are other pages I can't think of off the top of my head, and I should also point out that the pages that were removed due to G5, I didn't actually create those pages, I just did a copy/paste from the German language Wikipedia, used Google Translate, and made an English language version for those said pages. I even had to reword those pages to make sense for English readers. I don't know if that is against Wikipedia rules, but if it is, let me know. Sthacker21 (talk)

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, or you have not responded to questions raised during that time. 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) 21:23, 7 October 2024 (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.

No CU evidence of recent block evasion. This is due at least in part to a checkuser-block placed by another admin, preventing any possible evasion. I won't be reviewing this unblock request, but I'd expect to see some evidence this user knows how to properly cite material and I see no evidence of that. I'm also not convinced this user understands how to properly attribute content when copying and translating from the German language Wikipedia. --Yamla (talk) 11:33, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla, then explain to me how to "properly" attribute. Do I need to put some sort of stamp on that said page indicating it was interpreted from a foreign language page? With all due respect, like I said, I had them properly attributed and cited, even before they were erased for G5. But you can look at pages like Dave Grunewald, Future Palace, From Fall to Spring, and Vitja, which I'm surprised are still standing despite the G5 rule and you'll see the attributions and citing. Since I had to use Google Translate, I had to set them in the format for the English page. Sthacker21 (talk)

We don't want anyone using google translate to make articles on English Wikipedia. Please see WP:HOWTRANS for information on translation. -- asilvering (talk) 21:20, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024 unblock request 2

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).

Sthacker21 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Alright, fine! You made your damn point! I won't use sockpuppets or jack around and edit regardless of notability on this site anymore. And fine, I'll use that WP:HOWTRANS page as asilvering prescribed to translate foreign language pages. The whole reason I ever used Google Translate in the first place was because not only I was familiar with it, but also I didn't bother looking at any guidelines from this site over the past. I would also like to restore the pages Rising Insane, Our Mirage, Venues, AVIANA, Engst, Kevin Ratajczak, and Nico Sallach and since those now deleted pages were translated from German pages, I would like for someone fluent in both English and German as the for those pages otherwise I could do those pages all over again using the proper translation pages. Sthacker21

Decline reason:

I'm sorry, while I can empathize with your frustration, your request to restore deleted pages that, per your own admission earlier, [you] just did a copy/paste from the German language Wikipedia, used Google Translate, and made an English language version for those said pages shows that you still don't understand the importance of both attribution and referencing. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 19:20, 30 October 2024 (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 is asking that their block be reviewed:

Sthacker21 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

OK, fine then, I won't restore those pages, I'll just have to redo those pages all over again from scratch using the WP:HOWTRANS format and I will seek out an administrator who is fluent in English and German for proofreading. Is that good enough for you? At this point, I feel like I am being punished for more than just sock puppetry and long term abuse! Sthacker21

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2= OK, fine then, I won't restore those pages, I'll just have to redo those pages all over again from scratch using the [[WP:HOWTRANS]] format and I will seek out an administrator who is fluent in English and German for proofreading. Is that good enough for you? At this point, I feel like I am being punished for more than just sock puppetry and long term abuse! [[User:Sthacker21|Sthacker21]] |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1= OK, fine then, I won't restore those pages, I'll just have to redo those pages all over again from scratch using the [[WP:HOWTRANS]] format and I will seek out an administrator who is fluent in English and German for proofreading. Is that good enough for you? At this point, I feel like I am being punished for more than just sock puppetry and long term abuse! [[User:Sthacker21|Sthacker21]] |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1= OK, fine then, I won't restore those pages, I'll just have to redo those pages all over again from scratch using the [[WP:HOWTRANS]] format and I will seek out an administrator who is fluent in English and German for proofreading. Is that good enough for you? At this point, I feel like I am being punished for more than just sock puppetry and long term abuse! [[User:Sthacker21|Sthacker21]] |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

We don't block people to punish them, we block them to prevent disruption to the encyclopedia. Now that you're blocked, what we want to see is not that you've "served your time" and feel remorse (although some remorse is good), but that you're going to be someone who makes positive contributions to the encyclopedia. Right now it sounds like your plan is to do something very similar to what got you blocked in the first place. This unblock request doesn't address Rosguill's concerns about whether or not you understand attribution and referencing, and it also promises that you'll make further demands on other editors' time for no real reason. Please reconsider. -- asilvering (talk) 21:09, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

asilvering, I am not gonna use Google Translate for creating English pages if that is what you're implying. I'll use the WP:HOWTRANS format. Truth is I had no idea using Google Translate for creating English pages was against policy, because in truth, I never even read the policies back when I started. I just edited away. Sthacker21

^ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Tevin21&action=edit&redlink=1

[1] ttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Tevin21&action=edit&redlink=1

[1]