User talk:Hwood777

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Boleyn (talk) 17:19, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content.

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 ~~~~}}. Swarm ♠ 20:01, 18 June 2018 (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).

Hwood777 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i did not know i was required to answer a question someone asked of me, i know now Hwood777 (talk) 20:33, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You were also blocked for refusing to cite your additions, but forgot to address that in your request. Yamla (talk) 20:58, 18 June 2018 (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.

Also, how can you claim you "didn't know you were required"? You were clearly told on May 20 that "It is also Wikipedia policy that you have to respond", with an attached link to WP:Communication is required, and you were told again on June 8 that "Communication is mandatory". In spite of this, you responded to the sixth attempt to communicate with you by blanking your page. If you really didn't know, then it is a competence issue, because there should be no reason whatsoever that you didn't know. Please just own up to your wrongdoings, rather than lying, and we can actually consider unblocking you. See WP:GAB for instructions. Swarm ♠ 21:32, 18 June 2018 (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).

Hwood777 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Yes i was asked to respond and i ignored it. going forward i will use sources and respond to all requests thank you for understanding and guiding me in the ways of wikipedia. please consider me for unblocking Hwood777 (talk) 22:15, 18 June 2018 (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 that you are willing and able to contribute positively to Wikipedia. You can do this by:

Familiarizing yourself with our basic rules.
Read our guide to improving articles
Pick 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]]);
  - 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 will include 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 Save.
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 and an administrator will review your proposed edits.
- If we (including the original blocking admin) are convinced that your proposed edits will 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. 331dot (talk) 09:02, 1 July 2018 (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.

{{unblock | It has been over 6 months may I be consider for unblocking? [[User:Hwood777|Hwood777]] ([[User talk:Hwood777#top|talk]]) 21:57, 7 February 2019 (UTC)}}

Are you declining to avail yourself of the opportunity given to you above to demonstrate that you can make a constructive contribution? 331dot (talk) 22:00, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

i would like to prove i am a constructive contributor please give me a chance Hwood777 (talk) 16:21, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above instructions give you the chance to show that. If you are declining to use that process, please say so. 331dot (talk) 17:45, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

link to removed talk page discussion and unblock discussion[edit]

It was certainly hard to make heads or tails of this. I'm putting a link here to the revision before the mass removal to ease the ascertaining of context. I would be willing to unblock, but don't want to rush into anything. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 13:53, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for considering to unblock. Hwood777 (talk) 14:10, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

would you please consider me for unblock? I understand what i did was not following the rules of editing and will not ignore requests in the future User talk:Swarm Hwood777 (talk) 13:18, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot remove declined unblock requests while the block is in effect. You may remove the other content, if you wish. Since I gather you are withdrawing your most recent request, I have deactivated it. If you change your mind, you may make another. 331dot (talk) 23:20, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Duchess of Sussex for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Duchess of Sussex 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/Duchess of Sussex 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. Surtsicna (talk) 09:57, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]