User talk:Gamma286

Image copyright problem with Image:Woll Smoth original.jpg[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Woll Smoth original.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 12:28, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your image was inserted successfully into Will Smith, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 13:01, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate images to Wikipedia, as you did to Will Smith; it is considered to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 13:01, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate images to Wikipedia, as you did to Will Smith. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 13:01, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to TheBlazkienMaster's page[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to User:TheBlazkienMaster. Your edits appeared to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Alexius08 (talk) 13:11, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

March 2008[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for vandalism to User:TheBlazikenMaster. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 13:13, 13 March 2008 (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).

Gamma286 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

hes mad that i took away his mudkips

Decline reason:

Is that even a reason to unblock you? Declined. _{The public face of GB}^T/C 13:20, 13 March 2008 (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.

I am keeping an eye on you until I see you making good edits. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 13:24, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did to User talk:TheBlazikenMaster, you will be blocked from editing. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Detarder)} 04:50, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case[edit]

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Tryptech for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Bazzargh (talk) 16:37, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Wollysmoth.jpg[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Wollysmoth.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 04:49, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy because your account is being used only for vandalism. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 11:58, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see absolutely no reason to spy on you anymore since you are permanently blocked. Have a nice day. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 13:15, 15 March 2008 (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).

Gamma286 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The first thing I would like to say is that the account has been used for much more than just vandalism, Check my history if you don't believe me. Also, I request that you do something about TheBlazikenMaster continuing to harass me by means of the talk page from now on. For someone who takes "the high road," saying "I see absolutely no reason to spy on you anymore since you are permanently blocked. Have a nice day" seems unnecessary.

Decline reason:

Taking a quick look. Participated in Colbert-related vandalism; participated in what seems to be coordinated vandalism to the Will Smith article; created some pages which have since been deleted; fiddled with the release date for a video game; harassed other users. This is supposed to represent a history of useful contributions? Sorry to say, but I don't see a compelling case to believe you'll suddenly become a productive user, not at this time. Might be a decision to revisit at some later date. – Luna Santin (talk) 08:58, 16 March 2008 (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 accepted the request.

Gamma286 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This is an account I've had for the past 12 years, to myself. I was banned for sockpuppetry (which was incorrect, and I don't think an IP comparison was even performed) and vandalism (which was valid). As the ban has been in effect for 10 years, and any individual can mature over the course of a decade, I would appreciate being unblocked so that I can make future edits. Specifically, there's a required edit on the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percentile page under Second Variant Example Two where incorrect information is being displayed. Gamma286 (talk) 17:27, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

I am prepared to accept that this editor is now expecting to be a responsible editor. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 18:21, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Elkman: I am, as you can see, requesting a comment from the blocking admin. I appreciate that the block-worthy activity was ten years ago, as I am sure will he. While waiting for a comment from Elkman, please tell us what you would like to write about? (I note the single example you have already given).--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 17:37, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm reviewing this ten years after the original request. I'd love to change the world, but I'm no longer an admin. I don't know what to do, so I'll leave it up to you. (OK, enough musical references there.) I would expect that ten years after the initial vandalism, you wouldn't have the same motivations to vandalize the Will Smith article and people's user pages. If you repeat any vandalism, this user talk page and the block log should be sufficient to make a current admin aware of your past. Otherwise, life is funny, skies are sunny, and bees make honey. (OK, that's really enough with the musical references.) --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 18:37, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I am minded to unblock you. Please first answer my question regarding your editing intentions.--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 20:12, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the delay! I just re-reviewed the statistics example that I had originally tagged as needing editing on my end and noticed that the editor had posted a different sample array which adjusted the calculations I had on my end, indicating that the originally posted end result of 3.25 was indeed correct and no edit was needed. Sorry for the misinterpretation on my end! If you would like, feel free to unban; however, I'm okay with waiting until I have another solid case in which I need an edit made. Currently, my use-cases for edits are few and far between and are usually scoped to obscure items like technology release dates and such.