User talk:ThomasK

This page is currently protected from editing to prevent ThomasK (talk · contribs · block log · arb · SPI^confirmed_suspected) from using it to make disruptive edits, such as abusing the {{unblock}} template.
If you cannot edit this user talk page and you need to make a change or leave a message, you can request an edit, request unprotection, log in, or create an account.

This is ThomasK's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

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).

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

Request reason:

Please unblock my account without delay, I will do whatever it takes to show you all that I´m serious with my efforts to help wikipedia --ThomasK (talk) 14:00, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Please prove it by working on an "article" in a special thread on this page. If it's satisfactory, you will be unblocked. Thanks. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:14, 23 March 2010 (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 can´t do that with an indefinite block on my account ..... --ThomasK (talk) 14:15, 23 March 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

you have to give me a chance first --ThomasK (talk) 14:18, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

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

Familiarizing yourself with our basic rules.
Reading our guide to improving articles.
Picking any pre-existing article you wish to improve.
- If you have trouble choosing an article to improve, see this index of articles needing improvement for ideas.

Once you have decided on the article you will propose improvements to:

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

If you need help while working with your proposed edits, you may add "{{Help me|your question here ~~~~}}" to your talk page. Thank you. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:40, 23 March 2010 (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.

You are still allowed to open up an article's source while blocked, copy and paste it here and edit it. Pick one. Daniel Case (talk) 16:04, 23 March 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

I can´t even open up an article's source. Lift this unfair indefinite block immediately. That´s my demand. I have a right to request so. I contributed enormously to Wikipedia and it´s more than four years since I last vandalized an article. I won´t do this anymore in the future. --ThomasK (talk) 11:16, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You haven't vandalized an article in four years because you have been blocked for four years. Based on the tone of your unblock request and your inability to agree to JulianColton's simple request, I am declining. Smashville^talk 14:05, 24 March 2010 (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.

Reverted you again. You are not allowed to remove declined unblock requests while you are still blocked--Jac16888 ^Talk 13:35, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:ANI where the issue of your unblocking has been raised. If you can put together a reasonable unblock request (not a demand to be unblocked), there is probably a fair chance of success. If it is true that you have refrained from sockpuppetry while blocked, that should also count in your favour. Remember, what admins granteth, admins may taketh away. Mjroots (talk) 14:19, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks four you hint of trust. But I´m now banned from the wiki chat and can´t edit the WP:ANI page you suggested. So what should I do now? --ThomasK (talk) 14:37, 24 March 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

I request politely that my account be unblocked completely. I won´t vandalize (with the exception of my talkpage) anything anymore, I did my time (4 years banned). Thanks --ThomasK (talk) 15:01, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You probably were going to get unblocked if you read the ANI section about you. Not anymore, you blew it pal Jac16888 ^Talk 16:51, 24 March 2010 (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.

As you have been told several times, while you are blocked you must leave declined unblock requests on your page. Every time you ignore this you're making it even less likely you'll ever be unblocked--Jac16888 ^Talk 15:39, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to unblock when I saw all the reversions and the insulting edit summaries, which to me were proof there was no intention to change. All you had to do was keep your cool and cooperate and you'd have been unblocked by now, as the ANI discussion was sympathetic to your request. Dougweller (talk) 19:22, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

please unblock. my apologizes. What I wrote was premature. Thanks --ThomasKsock (talk) 06:24, 25 March 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

Put all unblock request in a talk page archive, and give me a new chance a new beginning. I won´t be rude and won´t vandalize anything.

Decline reason:

Well, we do have something called WP:OFFER, but I'm not sure you're eligible. Removing declined unblocks - which is against policy - might have just voided that. If you really want to be unblocked, then you need to address those unblocks, the reasons around them, why they were declined, and your attitude as seen by your edit summaries (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 08:54, 5 July 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

I write that you all should put all unblock request in a talk page archive, and give me a new chance a new beginning. I won´t be rude and won´t vandalize anything. Which means I will adress the issues, so please unblock. Thanks

Decline reason:

There was not much support for unblocking you at ANI. If you wish to appeal this block further you may email the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:54, 11 July 2010 (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 do not remove declined unblock requests from your talk page. See WP:BLANKING. Dougweller (talk) 09:10, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You ignored me and removed them again. I've protected your talk page but left your last unblock request. You can't edit this anymore. If this request is declined you will be told how to appeal by email. Dougweller (talk) 09:24, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the request isn't on hold in order to contact the original admin (he or she is long gone) but to run it past ANI. However I shan't unblock you or your sock accounts in order to comment there. We shall decide it on merit without your input for now. If you sock in order to get over there I guarantee it will be declined. Give it time. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 10:58, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request moved from user page

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).

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

Request reason:

Please give me on last chance, I can't prove that I'm serious about this if I´m indefinite blocked.

Decline reason:

Per your impatience and petulance as demonstrated below and above, and by my having to make this edit through full protection. Be seeing you (NOT!) Daniel Case (talk) 15:34, 25 July 2010 (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've taken this to ANI as well. If this gets declined, with all your pages locked down, either use the email or just give up on it, mate. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 08:00, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as he was told to go away for 6 months, then come back as per WP:OFFER a mere 3 weeks ago, this recent series of events probably has 100% invalidated that possibility. Of course, telling is all to "fuck off" on a March edit probably was even worse. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:04, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a WP:SOCK (User:ThomasKone) was a new low on the "dumb things I have done" scale. You're trying to be welcomed back - being welcomed back requires you to learn, understand, and show understanding of the rules. You know about WP:SOCK - yet you broke it anyway. Wikipedia is a privately-run site, you have no rights here, and flaunting the rules because you think you have a right to an active account is just plain dumb. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:14, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

... and your violation of WP:EVADE found here has reset the clock...and now the earliest time for WP:OFFER will if you are lucky be the end of April 2011. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 07:23, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of GlobalSecurity.org for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article GlobalSecurity.org 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/GlobalSecurity.org until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 template from the top of the article. Toddst1 (talk) 20:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]