User talk:-ahab-

Welcome![edit]

Hello, -ahab-, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as User:-ahab-, 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! | Uncle Milty | talk | 12:08, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:-ahab-[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.

A tag has been placed on User:-ahab- requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://ahabofficial.com/bio. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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 "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. | Uncle Milty | talk | 12:08, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the above again, and especially follow the link regarding Wikipedia's rules regarding copyright. Copyrighted material is not allowed on Wikipedia, period. No exceptions. Not only did your page violate these rules, it was also a purely promotional page. Wikipedia is not a listing service or a place to tell the world about yourself. Additionally, I will continue to delete the comments you post to my AFD log. If you want to discuss this, we can either do it here or on my talk page. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 16:36, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

December 2015[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:58, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked you because you were extremely disruptive and repeatedly vandalized one of Uncle Milty's user pages. I understand that you were upset over your userpage deletion, but there were valid reasons why this occurred. Userpages should generally only contain information about yourself as it pertains to Wikipedia editing. Some minor trivia is OK, but your userpage was very promotional and came across like you were trying to create a profile like people do on Bandcamp. This is not permitted per Wikipedia's guidelines, as Wikipedia is not a social media site or a place like Bandcamp. I had initially blocked you for 48 hours, but I'm not entirely sure that you're here to edit Wikipedia in a beneficial manner. You might be able to be unblocked, but you will need to show that you understand the following:

That Wikipedia is not a place to promote yourself.
That vandalizing someone's userpage in an act of revenge is not an acceptable response.
That if you are unblocked, that it's recommended that you not write about yourself per WP:AUTOBIO

If you can show that you really understand this, you might be able to be unblocked. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:00, 15 December 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).

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

Request reason:

Let me just pick two artists at random (Both Wikipedia links), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britney_Spears, who has an external link to her own website. A dead singer - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lennon, died before 13 years before 1993 the year Wikipedia was founded again a external link to an official website and it's impossible that it's been edited or produced by himself, rather making both your points correct. Am sorry you've blocked me, but as for my so called vandalising of Uncle Milty page. I would class that as making a point that he is wrong (as shown above to yourself and repeatedly to him) and he knows how to stop me posting by the removal of the two unjust deletion requests on my account, which is also an unacceptable act of vandalism started by himself/which he can stop happening at any time

Decline reason:

Your first posts to Uncle Milty's AFD log page might perhaps have been put down to a new editor not understanding how to communicate on Wikipedia, rather than vandalism. However, your persistently editing there after your edits had repeatedly been reverted show that you had no intention of cooperating, and amounted to an attempt to harass the editor. It is also clear that your only purpose here is to use Wikipedia for promotion, which is not what Wikipedia is for, and so unblocking you would not benefit the project. In addition, unblock requests which attack other editors are virtually never successful, as you must be aware if you took the advice to read the guide to appealing blocks before making the request. As for your comments about Britney Spears and John Lennon, it is difficult to see how those could be considered relevant to a request for your account to be unblocked. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:24, 16 December 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.

Both Spears and Lennon are notable enough to have articles, so it makes some sense to have their official website on their articles, especially as articles are different from userspace pages. However in your case it was on your userpage and was accompanied by some very promotional prose, which is why the page was seen as an attempt to promote yourself on Wikipedia, why Milty nominated it for deletion, and why Anthony Bradbury deleted it. Now as far as your explanation for your actions goes, vandalizing his userpage is not an acceptable response. Not only is that completely unacceptable on Wikipedia, but this played a major role in why I decided to block you. That you feel no remorse for what you've done and you don't see where it's unacceptable will greatly impact whether or not another admin will unblock you. I'll openly say that based on your response, I'm not going to unblock you and I'd recommend against anyone else unblocking you. Basically, there was a valid reason for your userpage's deletion, as it was self-promotion. Rather than engage either Milty or Anthony in conversation normally, you vandalized Milty's userspace despite a clear indication that this was unacceptable behavior. Once blocked for self-promotion and vandalism, you've shown no indication that you'll act any differently if you were unblocked. This alone so far gives enough indication that you should remain blocked. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:54, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are various bands and acts of a similar notary that use Wikipedia in a similar way and I'd be willing to give examples of them to you. There is also a chance that with the fact that this site can be edited by non users on various accounts without permission and that being one of the least known about pieces of legislation that it could be happening now, check everything today, Uncle Mitty you have a hobbies their. How are bands and acts suppose to reach that level notary if an output such as Wikipedia is shut off to them? I'd ask you. Knowing a fair bit on John Lennon (and Beatles) he/they would potentially have been up in arms about this copyright infringement/or not known about it (especially in he's/there early career) and would have posted the site anyway whether it was deemed as advertising or had record label/copyright approval and potentially got to know anyone who had set one up for them. I didn't even know about it, so have a close down without good warning because of it. Within 24 hours having work on something that was to be a gift to the band (for them to edit/use their own views on), which they may have deleted straight away anyway. So the vandalising? (vandalising is term I always as a permanent act or more or less permanent act) I would again class he's act, an act of vandalising. Mine a now act of advertising for a short while (on he's deletion fed) until it becomes a gift or joins he's very geeky deletion list (geeky to level that it's almost over the top). Basically because I feel the ruling on this copyright legalisation should be re-written with regards to this site and I think with he's/her's particular style of deletion method that me typing on he's deletion fed will reach some people (possibly feeling the same way) as my page was likely to reach over time in a not advertising fashion as described above. As for judgemental stance on what I'll do next, which some would call defamation of character bearing in mind you most probably don't know me, watch this space you may be impressed and unblock me. Or not but your just outlining a point that's become apparent to me with all the endless blocking and more a less rule book you and Milty have thrown at me that Wikipedia is a bit sad, used by sad geeks and people with to much time on their hands, who don't like people learning. CHANGE MY VIEW.

Wikipedia follows the USA's copyright guidelines. In order to change this, you'd have to change the copyright laws in general, because Wikipedia is very unlikely to change their site guidelines any time soon when it comes to copyright violations. They're strict because otherwise they run the risk of getting sued by multiple people, as content here is supposed to be fair use. As far as content goes, all content needs to establish how the topic is notable enough to pass guidelines and you cannot use your talk page as a way to promote anything, nor is it supposed to be used as a WP:WEBHOST for them to edit like a Bandcamp page. I honestly don't see where you get this and you classifying Milty's actions as vandalism shows that do not understand Wikipedia's purpose. It's not meant to raise awareness or promote a band and all topics must have notability established prior to being on Wikipedia. As far as changing your viewpoint goes, I don't think that anything I say is going to change your opinion because you seem rather determined to spam for this band and you're not going to listen to any of us. These rules are here for a reason, because Wikipedia is full of people trying to spam for various different things and if the site allowed that in, it'd pretty much kill the purpose of Wikipedia. Since you don't seem key to do anything other than spam and you're pretty much making WP:ADHOMINEM attacks against anyone who will not let you do whatever you want, I'm actually tempted to cut off your talk page access since I don't think that there's any true chance of you ever getting unblocked with this attitude. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:16, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You could cut off my talk page as it's coming down anyway as described in the previous message and if not replying to your messages hasn't shown am willingness to listen, I don't know what will. Bandcamp is a rubbish product (sorry if you like yourself) and this band are of a notary where they should be able to decide whether they want a page setting in up for them. If you know how to do that it would be very helpful as you seem quite knowledgable to all the Wikipedia shortcuts and hot keys jargon, but it would mean me having to have the two deletion requests on my account removed, so I could transfer the hard work over (permanently removed without informing the user, to be replace with permanent text by Uncle Mitty which cannot be easily removed by the user, more or less describing graffiti, an act of vandalism). As I know there are bands who have broken this copyright law before on here, don't want to give names as it may give Milty ideas on who to serve deletion requests on next. And on USA's copyright guidelines, they have the right to change any policy relating to any website they choose, without changing their Copyright Law. Enjoy your day, Tokyogirl79.

Your userpage was still promotional. As far as the band goes, it's not up to the band whether or not they have a page in either the userspace or in the mainspace. Wikipedia is not a place where a band can set up an official page. The reason I keep bringing up Bandcamp is because you still seem to be under the impression that the band can "own" a page or an account on Wikipedia where they can promote their work or otherwise use it as an advertising front or blog. That's the biggest difference between those sites and Wikipedia, as Wikipedia is not meant to be used to promote something. The userspace is only meant to cover information as it pertains to how one edits on Wikipedia and in the mainspace all bands must show that they pass WP:NBAND or risk deletion. In either area promotional tones are not acceptable. Since this doesn't seem to be going anywhere, I'm going to revoke talk page access. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:56, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent disruptive editing. Your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:57, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]