User talk:Coglio15

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Coglio15, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as History of Hellas, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other 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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Dewritech (talk) 20:06, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, History of Hellas[edit]

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.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, History of Hellas. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – History of Greece. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at History of Greece – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, 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. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Dewritech (talk) 20:06, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Dewritech, pleased to meet you! I left a response, but I think it was unfair to delete the article without giving it a chance. Coglio15 (talk) 20:49, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as History of Hellas, to Wikipedia, as doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Wikipedia:Your first article; you might also consider using the Article Wizard. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Rather than create a duplicate page, you would be better advised to discuss the situation at Talk:History of Greece and work on improving that article. —C.Fred (talk) 20:58, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, History of Hellas[edit]

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.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, History of Hellas. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – History of Greece. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at History of Greece – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, 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. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 21:57, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If the current state of the History of Greece article bothers you so much, then try rewriting it (you could even do so with the text from this article) instead of creating a separate page, which makes a big mess. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 22:01, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey G S Palmer! The 'history of Greece' doesn't even have an 'EDIT' option! (Probably 'cause the PSEUDOPATRONS don't want the public to read ACCURATE FACTS.) So, why shouldn't the 'history of Hellas' be created and preserved if it's SUPERIOR to the 'history of Greece' in practically everything? Coglio15 (talk) 22:12, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because some editors have abused the privilege of editing the page, so the page is now protected. You'll need to discuss your desired edits at Talk:History of Greece and get support for the edits. —C.Fred (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

civility warning[edit]

Wiki has a rule requiring civility: "The civility policy is a standard of conduct that sets out how Wikipedia editors should interact. Stated simply, editors should always treat each other with consideration and respect. In order to keep the focus on improving the encyclopedia and to help maintain a pleasant editing environment, editors should behave politely, calmly and reasonably, even during heated debates." WP:CIVIL. You rants on Talk:History of Greece suggest you may be unable to discuss issues in a respectful manner. That will lead to a short career at Wikipedia, so please cleam up your language. Rjensen (talk) 18:12, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Heya Rjensen! Sorry for the dirty lingo, but I'm MAD at some of the things I've seen. But you're 100% RIGHT that I should keep my cool. Thanks for talkin' to me. Peace. Coglio15 (talk) 18:20, 26 September 2014 (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).

Coglio15 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This is an OUTRAGE! I'm being DISCRIMINATED against for being a REAL PATRON! If Wikipedia is 'so glad I'm here', THEN WHY DOES IT BAN ME FOR DOING THE RIGHT THING?

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. 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. Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 20:56, 26 September 2014 (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).

Coglio15 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

1) Since I started, I AIN'T DAMAGED JACK ON WIKIPEDIA. 2) I'm blocked 'cause PSEUDOPATRONS hate and discriminate against REAL PATRONS and come up with retarded excuses (like "obvious sock of RANDOM ACCOUNT NO ONE GIVES A RAT ABOUT") to stop REAL PATRONAGE AND DENY THE PUBLIC ACCURATE INFO. 3) It ain't 'damaging' or 'disruptive' to RESPECT REAL PATRONS by takin' out text lookin' like GARBAGE to putting in SOMETHING I DIDN'T MAKE THAT IS INTELLIGENT AND BENEFICIAL TO THE PUBLIC. 4) I've been makin' useful contributions SINCE DAY 1 (except for the dirty lingo, but I stopped usin' it thanks to Rjensen). Peace. Coglio15 (talk) 21:39, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request, for a number of reasons, including that I don't understand most of what you're saying. In your next unblock request, I suggest you calmly explain why you should be unblocked in a manner that is actually understandable to someone unfamiliar with your case. PhilKnight (talk) 22:10, 26 September 2014 (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).

Coglio15 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Blocked for HELPING THE PUBLIC by takin' out MISLEADING TEXT (EXAMPLE A, EXAMPLE B) and putting in EXISTING GOOD TEXT THAT ACCURATELY INFORMS THE PUBLIC AND MAKES PEOPLE S-M-A-R-T-E-R. Simple enough? Peace. Coglio15 (talk) 23:10, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

None of this addresses the reason for your block. Please use your original account. Kuru (talk) 23:46, 26 September 2014 (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.