User talk:Zee zack

Image:IMG_2658.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:IMG_2658.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Nv8200p talk 02:52, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Neo-Steampunk

A tag has been placed on Neo-Steampunk requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a club, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guidelines for people and for organizations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. TrulyBlue (talk) 10:26, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spam warning

Please stop inserting spam or you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted. Thanks and good wishes. --Boston (talk) 04:50, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Clair Cooper

A tag has been placed on Clair Cooper requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 19:34, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Zee zack! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 46 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Clair Cooper - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 16:45, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kenji Ekuan

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Kenji Ekuan, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.designmeetings.net/biographies/kenji-ekuan/.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 03:41, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have deleted the page. Please rewrite things in your own words instead of copying & pasting what you find on the internet. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:37, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Nobuo Abe

Hello Zee zack,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Nobuo Abe for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Kharkiv07 (talk) 21:22, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of J.C. Nance

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on J.C. Nance requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. GILO A&E⇑ 14:57, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Donald Prickett

Hi, I'm Fisheriesmgmt. Zee zack, thanks for creating Donald Prickett!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Good start! Please remember that it's important to cite the sources you use as you expand this article to provide more information on Prickett's life and career. Let me know if I can help!

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Fisheriesmgmt (talk) 16:11, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Edward Giller

Hi, I'm Fisheriesmgmt. Zee zack, thanks for creating Edward Giller!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Good start! Please remember to include references and in-line citations for the information you add to expand this article in the future.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Fisheriesmgmt (talk) 16:11, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jaromir Astl

Hello Zee zack,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Jaromir Astl for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Fisheriesmgmt (talk) 16:14, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Edward Giller

Hello Zee zack,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Edward Giller for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Fisheriesmgmt (talk) 16:14, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Donald Prickett

Hello Zee zack,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Donald Prickett for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Fisheriesmgmt (talk) 16:14, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Edward Giller

The article Edward Giller has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Wgolf (talk) 17:54, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Brian Dunne

The article Brian Dunne has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Wgolf (talk) 17:55, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jaromir Astl

The article Jaromir Astl has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Wgolf (talk) 17:56, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice about using Youtube as refs

Now you can use Youtube, but please don't have that be your only reference. Thanks!Wgolf (talk) 17:58, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Donald Prickett

The article Donald Prickett has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Bio with only source going to youtube.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Wgolf (talk) 17:59, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jaromir Astl

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Jaromir Astl requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Wgolf (talk) 18:08, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Edward Giller

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Edward Giller requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Wgolf (talk) 19:53, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of J.C. Nance

The article J.C. Nance has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Wgolf (talk) 19:53, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jaromir Astl

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Jaromir Astl requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Wgolf (talk) 03:10, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Giller

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Edward Giller, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.militarybios.com/biography/MajorGeneralEdwardBGiller.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 03:16, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Of all the things you should not be doing, removing a copyright alert from an article is one of them. We take copyright violations very seriously, and they are deleted on sight. I'm not sure if all these articles you've been creating are notable, but please consider pacing yourself. Pick one, develop it in your sandbox or a draft, put some time into it, find good sources, etc. The project isn't particularly well served with a one-line stub and a link to IMDb (which by the way is not a reliable source and not accepted as the sole source in a biography). I realize this can be frustrating, but you need to follow Wikipedia policies and guidelines. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 07:33, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 11:26, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please slow down

Please slow down your rate of article creation. You're just creating stubs. Why not improve them more before moving on to the next? Some of your topics may not meet the notability standard. Origamite^ⓣⓒ 16:34, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Nelkin

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Mark Nelkin, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.aep.cornell.edu/people/profile-em.cfm?netid=msn3.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 01:48, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violations

Hello. I am Diannaa and I am an administrator on this wiki. Prose you find online is almost always copyright, and cannot be copied here; it's against the law to do so. All prose must be written in your own words. There's more information about copyrights and how it applies to Wikipedia at Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright. Copyright law and its application are complex matters, and you should not edit any more until you have taken the time to read and understand our copyright policies. Further copyright violations will result in you being blocked from editing. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:52, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Nelkin

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Mark Nelkin, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.aep.cornell.edu/people/profile-em.cfm?netid=msn3.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 01:54, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for copyright violations. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Diannaa (talk) 01:59, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have deleted the following articles as copyright violations:

J.C. Nance: 94% match to astronautix.com/articles/probirth.htm
Mark Nelkin: 84.6% match with http://www.aep.cornell.edu/people/profile-em.cfm?netid=msn3
Edward Giller: 45% match to http://projects.militarytimes.com/citations-medals-awards/recipient.php?recipientid=27247
Françoise Ulam: 68% match to http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/santafenewmexican/obituary.aspx?pid=150769924

If you think this is an acceptable level of copying from copyright sources, you are not welcome to edit here. The amount of direct copying needs to be approaching zero, even for dry content and lists.

You re-created the article on Mark Nelkin three times, even though you knew it was being deleted as a copyright violation. You repeatedly removed notices placed by Coren Search Bot on your illegal copyright content additions to that article and the one on Edward Giller. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, to protect the Wikimedia Foundation and the rights of copyright holders. You will have to demonstrate that you thoroughly understand copyright law and how it applies to Wikipedia editing, as well as make a commitment to not repeat the behaviour that got you blocked, before an unblock can be considered. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:33, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One unblock request at a time, please. Having multiple open unblock requests reduces the probability of an admin seriously considering your unblock. I suggest you consolidate your unblock rationale in one request. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 04:03, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask what connection you have to User:Theoldcounty who seems to be very interested in the very same topics as you? (@Diannaa: Peridon (talk) 12:33, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The alternate account was created while you were blocked, in order to evade the block. That is not a permitted use of alternate accounts. The new account re-created the four copyright-violating articles, too. I am pretty sure that even if you understand copyright law, you have no intention of obeying it. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:18, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

theoldcounty is an alternative account of mine. I have read and understood copyright law and how and how it applies to Wikipedia editing. In response I will ensure I follow the terms properly and commit to this, so as not to repeat the behaviour that got me blocked. I am not here to create damage I only wish to instil factual information that can be grown and added to by the community. I did take time to refactor those articles to ensure they did not invade those copyright violations. I agree with you about trying to ensure the articles are refactored properly. How else may I appease your concerns. I would like the chance to prove myself and the administrators.

Decline reason:

Your actions following the block have directly contradicted your statement that you will not repeat these violations. You created the alternative account User:Theoldcountry in order to evade the block (a violation of Wikipedia policy on WP:SOCK) and proceeded to recreate copyright violations [1]. I do not trust that you understand nor will follow Wikipedia policies. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 19:36, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Note that fair-use/fair-dealing laws are more permissive than Wikipedia policies on the subject; see WP:Non-free content. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 19:26, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

I was unaware at the time that to use an alternative account to restore and refactor information in a more appropriate manner was also a violation. I really didn't expect or anticipate the seriousness of the block. Having been blocked for the first time. I request from the administrators and others a method of redemption. A trial. I would also like to claim that I had not re-violated the copyright infringement - I did refactor the articles though and source more information to build a useful nest of data. The articles were each screened and there were no apparent problems indicating otherwise. I had done a better task at lowering similarity and making the article more unique.

Decline reason:

In reviewing your claim, the first article I checked was the recreation of Françoise Ulam. In the original article, you did indeed copy material directly from that source. In the recreation with your sock account, you again copied material directly from the source. There is zero question that the material is a blatant copy. As long as you are unclear on why copying material is bad, there is no chance that anyone will unblock you. Sorry. Kuru (talk) 22:07, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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).

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

Request reason:

I am clear now, as to how strict the policies are in referencing material from wiki. I am keen to move forward from this.

Decline reason:

I have checked the editing history of this account and two accounts you have used to evade your block. It is clear that you can't be trusted at all. Also, even if I thought you could be trusted I would want evidence that you really do understand what was wrong with your past editing, not just you saying you do. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 22:42, 8 March 2015 (UTC)‎[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Now there's now two sockpuppet accounts: User:Fmccaffrey and User:Theoldcounty. Why the burning urgency to get these articles published? Are you a paid editor? -- Diannaa (talk) 00:26, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

What evidence shall I try and gather to show I truly understand the block and the reasons for it. I am keen to move forward. The alternative I would request a complete destruction of my account to avoid wasting further time for your staff. I am not trying to evade anything and I am being honest with my intentions. I find it very unfortunate there seems to be no way to appeal on a humanitarian or trial based level. No. I am not a paid editor. I don't know who User:Fmccaffrey is. My interest in getting these articles published - and grown by the community is because I am making an independent documentary on these subjects. Some of these people I am aiming to interview. I am trying to build a reliable public source of information of them from multiple sources. So that the wiki community can gradually grow more information on to them and as such aid in my own research - so I can make for a more detailed interview. I am sorry to have created so much aggravation.

Decline reason:

Creating Wikipedia articles about non-notable subjects so you can make a more detailed interview? That doesn't make sense, and coupled with the sockpuppetry and half-truths, I don't think Wikipedia is the project for you. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:14, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

So it's just a pure coincidence that an account whose other contribution was Pasley Communications (in 2009) has resurfaced to post a copyright violating article on one of the subjects you have done the same for? Peridon (talk) 11:37, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you are talking about. I don't know what Pasley Communications is, nor do I know which post you are referering too - or which subject. Please elaborate. zeezack 16:21, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Please see the deletion history of Edward Giller. Peridon (talk) 13:27, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, User:Fmccaffrey appears to be Unrelated to this account. On the other hand, as admitted above, User:Theoldcounty is a match. —DoRD (talk) 13:58, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for confirming. zeezack 16:21, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

I request that both accounts (Zee zack and Theoldcounty) now be retired. I won't be using either again from now on. Its very clear there is a grave misunderstanding of my intentions, purposes (that have actually yielded proactive and useful responses and growth of these non-notable subjects - which is at the end of the day is just your narrow minded opinion "Ohnoitsjamie"). Further appeals would just be hit with highly assumptive, judgemental and unforgiving responses from a team of egotistical driven administrators that expect its contributors to continue to plea. zeezack 02:37, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Your accounts are already "retired." See WP:DISAPPEAR. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:40, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also, "I won't be using either again" sounds like you plan to sock puppet with other accounts. Blocks are on the person, not the account. Origamite^ⓣⓒ 15:35, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jaromir Astl for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jaromir Astl 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/Jaromir Astl 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 notice from the top of the article. MSJapan (talk) 05:21, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Donald Prickett for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Donald Prickett 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/Donald Prickett 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 notice from the top of the article. MSJapan (talk) 03:26, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]