User talk:Billim1

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).

Billim1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I've been blocked from editing for days. I've done all I can get to convince Wikipedia editors to unblock me as soon as possible. I am still aware I was blocked for different reasons. Mainly because of disruptive editing. No longer will I blank anything in this "My Talk" section. Also, since I was unsuccessful at uploading images copyright wise, I will no longer do so. I joined Wikipedia to make a difference, not to play around. I like contributing to Wikipedia. Personally, I thought I had alot of constructive edits. I helped update pages that needed to be edited to be accurate. I've even created pages by myself successfully. Including: KXI96, Cabot Public School District, and more. Please let me be a part of the Wikipedia community again soon. I may know some information Wikipedia and others don't. Thank you.

Decline reason:

The trouble here goes beyond image copyright problems, or anything else. The problem is that you are not even trying to find out the right way to do things, and above all, not listening when someone tells you you're doing them incorrectly. Instead, after several other editors attempted to help you, you blanked your talk page without even responding (and after being told it was a bad idea, you started doing it more frequently). Is that allowable? Technically, yes, but it's rude and says you're not willing to accept help. Multiple, multiple times, you received notices that images you uploaded had been done improperly. It should not have taken the threat of a block to get you to stop that—at that point you should have immediately stopped uploading images until you were absolutely sure you knew what mistakes you had made and how not to make them again. Yet instead, you blanked those too, and carried right on doing the same thing you'd just been told not to do. I'm not at all convinced you understand the core of the reason you were blocked, or that anything will improve if you're unblocked. You might be acting in good faith, and we don't expect to see someone be competent in everything the first edit they make—but we do expect to see steady progress toward competence and the willingness to accept constructive criticism and use it to develop that competence. Looking through your edit history, I'm just not seeing that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 04:51, 29 November 2011 (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).

Billim1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please unblock me. I've mainly had problems with uploading images, and getting the right copyright information for them. Editing text however has not been a problem. I'm now better aware of my actions, and they shall not be repeated again through Wikipedia and/or its affiliates. Thank you.

Decline reason:

Per discussion below and recent edits alluded to like this. It'll be a while at this rate. — Daniel Case (talk) 05:01, 19 November 2011 (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.

Reviewing administrator, please note the long history of this talk page, involving many, many warnings about issues not limited to images, and my final warning to the user, which he blanked before continuing his problematic behavior. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 03:36, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Cabot Public Schools Logo 2011.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Cabot Public Schools Logo 2011.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:39, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

November 2011[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for long-term refusal to listen to or engage with warnings, per my final warning and your continuing the behavior. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 15:32, 15 November 2011 (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).

Billim1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Fluffernutter, Please unblock me soon!!! (By the way, I strongly agree that a fluffernutter is a sandwich. It sounds and looks delicious too!)

Decline reason:

You know, I can't see one constructive edit in all of your history. And you haven't given me any reason to unblock you here. I suggest you examine your own behaviour before appealing again. Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:54, 20 November 2011 (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.

Orphaned non-free image File:WHBQ.gif[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WHBQ.gif. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:27, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Cabot Public Schools logo.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Cabot Public Schools logo.png. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:11, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of National Weather Service North Little Rock, Arkansas for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article National Weather Service North Little Rock, Arkansas 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/National Weather Service North Little Rock, Arkansas 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. Rusf10 (talk) 17:19, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]