User talk:Votaw1989

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Votaw1989! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 02:49, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Introduction • Contributing to Wikipedia • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Get help at the Teahouse Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions Department directory Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Verifiability • No original research Reliable sources • Citing sources • Content guidelines What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sockpuppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper)
Things to do
Task Center • Be bold in editing Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Copy editing • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguation • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Template:World topic[edit]

Please don't use a parameterised version of Template:World topic as a fishing industry template, as you did here. There is already a dedicated template for the fishing industry, one which is better tuned to actual requirements. I appreciate you may be in thrall at the thought of using a universal template, encompassing everything. But the reality is that any "universal" template will have implicit underlying assumptions, and these underlying assumptions will result in the template performing poorly when it it used in certain specific contexts. There will perhaps be situations where the parameterised version works well, but you need to use discimination before you deploy these templates. Regards. — Epipelagic (talk) 03:42, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I gave Vataw1989 some advice at User talk:Gadfium/Archive 25#topic ideas where I urged the use of specialised templates over {{World topic}}. Prior to this they were adding a lot of useless templates as an IP editor, e.g. as User talk:2601:542:C003:FD50:77:7BBB:4EFA:549A. Their behaviour has improved since creating this account, but it seems not enough.

Votaw1989, I suggest you slow down and look harder for more appropriate templates before using World topic. It would also be helpful if you used edit summaries for each edit, and you replied to messages on your talk page such as the one above from Epipelagic and the one below from Laterthanyouthink. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, and at the moment you're not fitting in very well.-gadfium 04:39, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Please stop adding the World topic template indiscriminately. Navboxes should not be formatted with redirects or red links in the title. DrKay (talk) 20:11, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Defence/Defense Industry[edit]

As per your latest edits to Defense industry of Turkey and Defence industry of Australia, surely you would have seen the obvious problem here? Defence is spelt different to defense, and therefore the universal template does not pick up articles that use the other spelling. Even worse, articles relating to the defence industries of countries come with many different names - just a quick glance at Category:Military industry by country will confirm that. Please do actually think about this sort of thing before randomly adding the template to more pages. //Lollipoplollipoplollipop::talk 23:12, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Women's soccer in Australia, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 03:14, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What are you actually aiming to achieve? It looks as if you are creating a lot of redlinked templates, and not using edit summaries for any of your changes is very unhelpful to other editors. Can you (or anyone else who sees this) explain the purpose of the changes, and why I should not revert all of those creating the redlinked templates? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 03:24, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gun law in New Zealand[edit]

Please don't add {{World topic}} when there is already a handcrafted template linking to related articles. I have asked you this before. You are not adding any value with such edits.-gadfium 01:00, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. Schwede 66 00:18, 19 August 2022 (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).

Votaw1989 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

nothing is making sense

Decline reason:

Procedural decline; duplicate request. Yamla (talk) 20:21, 19 August 2022 (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).

Votaw1989 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

some people like my edits and such so if you can tell me what the problem is with template:world topic then maybe we can work something out. Votaw1989 (talk) 15:59, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Five editors, including myself, already explained that to you on this page[1][2][3][4][5] and elsewhere[6][7]. DrKay (talk) 16:39, 19 August 2022 (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.

Just to explain: Your contributions show that your edits mostly get reverted. There are many editors asking you to stop your disruptive edits. Yet there is nil response to attempts to communicate with you. Maybe a block will get some communication going with you. Feel free to outline that you understand what the problems are that you are creating and why it would never happen again. Schwede 66 00:20, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What did I do that was disruptive editing Votaw1989 (talk) 00:27, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at your contributions and see what's been reverted. Have a look at the messages above. Schwede 66 00:31, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I see it now, but can you please unblock me Votaw1989 (talk) 00:34, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So you don’t want me using the world topic template Votaw1989 (talk) 00:40, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You need to use the unblock template. And as it says, read the guide to appealing blocks first. It isn't quite as easy as "can you please unblock me"? Schwede 66 00:49, 19 August 2022 (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).

Votaw1989 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I didn’t do anything wrong I was just putting the world topic template in articles Votaw1989 (talk) 00:51, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

In the exchange above you said "I see it now". But now, barely ten minutes after, you go right back to not understanding what you did wrong. This does not suggest your communication skills are any better than they were when you got blocked for them, or rather the lack thereof. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:33, 19 August 2022 (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).

Votaw1989 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

some people like my edits and such and I don’t see the problem with the world topic template is

Decline reason:

As you don't see the problem with your edits, we will need to leave you blocked. Yamla (talk) 12:00, 19 August 2022 (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).

Votaw1989 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have amazing ideas for articles that make them better, also how may days do I have to wait for the indefinite block expire Votaw1989 (talk) 20:59, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I'm sorry, but I think there are bigger problems here than just disruptive editing. To prove that you can edit constructively, please make constructive edits at a sister project. You're only blocked on English Wikipedia. You can still edit Simple English Wikipedia, Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, etc. Build up a history of constructive edits over the course of six months, then make a new unblock request here. If you make another time-wasting unblock request, your talk page access on English Wikipedia will likely be disabled. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:50, 19 August 2022 (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.

UTRS appeal #62043[edit]

is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:25, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]