User talk:Cowboys01

Welcome!

Hi Cowboys01! I noticed your contributions to Mexican pop music and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 04:49, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to List of Mexican composers of classical music. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You added two paragraphs of original research. Magnolia677 (talk) 13:00, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 2601:19E:4180:6D50:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 22:52, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:57, 24 October 2023 (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).

Cowboys01 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I would like to draw your attention to the user Magnolia677, whose editing practices appear to be centered on promoting content that aligns solely with their personal preferences. This user consistently pursues a pattern of permitting only the content they deem valuable to themselves, even when the edits are factually accurate and sourced. Regrettably, their comments and actions do not align with an encyclopedic tone, despite the absence of false information or unbecoming language.

In a rather paradoxical manner, this user advises others to act appropriately, yet they themselves engage in similar behavior. It is evident that they recognize the accuracy of the information when only minor grammar corrections are made. However, instead of assisting in meeting established standards, they tend to remove contributions aimed at enhancing the quality of the article.

I kindly request your guidance and assistance in addressing this situation. Your expertise and insights would be greatly appreciated in ensuring that the editing process remains constructive, collaborative, and in adherence to the principles of producing high-quality encyclopedic content. Cowboys01 (talk) 00:06, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 01:57, 25 October 2023 (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).

Cowboys01 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I aim to maintain objectivity and present facts, addressing any concerns as they arise. Whenever an issue, such as a revert or notice on my talk page, arises, I do not persist in undoing changes or editing the same page in defiance. I simply move forward, striving to avoid repeating the issue. Regarding the "No original research" policy (WP:OR), if you review my talk page, you'll notice that the same user previously criticized me for not adhering to it. This indicates that, despite moving on from past edits or issues, I've been actively working to improve my edits based on feedback I've received. Nevertheless, I am committed to adding sources to all of my edits to bolster their credibility. I have never been advised to slow down, and I do not believe that my reversions or talk page notifications should carry significant weight, as I consistently adhere to the consensus, respecting reverts even when I disagree with the editing approach, and striving not to rekindle past issues, as evident in the edit history. I acknowledge that this is the reason for my previous block. I have no intention of causing further damage or disruption, and I am committed to making meaningful contributions. If there are any steps I can take to demonstrate my commitment to this, I would be willing to follow your guidance. Cowboys01 (talk) 19:58, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

None of this is relevant to your block. Yamla (talk) 20:07, 25 October 2023 (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.

Using AI to write your appeals does not help your case.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:07, 25 October 2023 (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).

Cowboys01 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have read the guide to appealing and I agree to all seed in the article Cowboys01 (talk)

Decline reason:

This request is incoherent. If you continue to make unproductive requests, you will lose access to this page. 331dot (talk) 08:59, 26 October 2023 (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.