User talk:QM400032

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On editing Help pages[edit]

Hello! I’ve noticed you seem to feel that the page Help:Wiki markup is missing some information. That’s great, but on instructional help pages like that one, instead of being WP:bold and simply adding new information yourself (which is encouraged in many other cases), it’s usually best to first seek consensus on the corresponding Talk page, just in case people disagree. This is especially true if similar additions have already been reverted.

I’ve tried to explain on that Talk page why your additions to the page don’t seem appropriate, but if I’m wrong, hopefully other editors will chime in there and correct me. But if anything in either that explanation or this one is unclear, please don’t hesitate to ask me to clarify. Thank you, and happy editing. —Frungi (talk) 22:18, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No fair use images on user page[edit]

You use File:Durango and Silverton Narrow Gauge Railroad.jpg in a userbox. This is against WP:UP#NOTSUITED. See also Wikipedia:Userboxes#Caution about image use. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:27, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is, I want to submit three brand new userboxes. I understand your concern and Wikipedia's policy, but I only want excellence in the new userboxes.QM400032 (talk) 12:52, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Userboxes#Caution about image use says: "fair use images are explicitly forbidden. This is interpreted strictly and without exception." This is a legal matter. We cannot violate copyright just because we want a prettier userbox. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:22, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a real problem, please tell me how I can resolve it.71.145.130.39 (talk) 23:04, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
By removing it. You seem reluctant to do the required so I have done it for you. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:36, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Taos Ski Valley Entrance.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Taos Ski Valley Entrance.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 13:18, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how to resolve fair use copyright violation! Could you please show me how?71.145.130.39 (talk) 23:06, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, roadfan![edit]

Hello, QM400032, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

If you are interested, there is already a community of users who are roadfans or who edit articles about roads, just like you! Stop by any of these WikiProjects—WP:HWY (worldwide), WP:AURD (Australia), WP:CRWP (Canada), WP:INR (India), WP:UKRD (United Kingdom), or WP:USRD (United States)—and contribute. If your interest is in roads in the United States, there is an excellent new user's guide. There is a wealth of information and resources for creating a great article. If you have questions about any of these WikiProjects, you can ask on each project's talk page, or you can ask me!

If you like communicating through IRC, feel free to ask questions at #wikipedia-en-roads connect as well. Here, there are several editors who are willing to answer your questions. For more information, see WP:HWY/IRC.

Again, welcome! Rschen7754 11:03, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Signature[edit]

Your signature doesn't include any links. You might want to add them, since it is a convenient way for people to access your user and user talk pages. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 22:14, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:SIGN#Internal_links carefully. Your signature does not provide any links to this page or your userpage. –Fredddie™ 05:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
QM400032, this really is kind of a big deal. People need to be able to get ahold of you from your Talk page comments. If you simply made a mistake, then please see Help:How to fix your signature; but if this problem remains unaddressed, I’m going to bring it up with admins at WP:ANI. —Frungi (talk) 01:37, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ontario Highway 17 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:01, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get to it as soon as possible. QM400032 (talk) 23:06, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of Interstate Highways may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:46, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of United States Numbered Highways may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:00, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Information icon Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

  1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
  2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 23:32, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Inc1[edit]

Template:Inc1 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Imzadi 1979 → 05:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Inc2[edit]

Template:Inc2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Imzadi 1979 → 05:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Inc3[edit]

Template:Inc3 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Imzadi 1979 → 05:08, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Inc4[edit]

Template:Inc4 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Imzadi 1979 → 05:08, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Inc5[edit]

Template:Inc5 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Imzadi 1979 → 05:08, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Inc6[edit]

Template:Inc6 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Imzadi 1979 → 05:08, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:DS/Wii key press[edit]

Template:DS/Wii key press has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. TheStickMan[✆Talk] 13:53, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Electronic arrow button key press[edit]

Template:Electronic arrow button key press has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. TheStickMan[✆Talk] 13:53, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for creation[edit]

I noticed you reviewed and accepted two submissions in Articles for creation. Accepting an article is more than just moving it, there is also some post-move cleanup to do. These steps are described at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions.

Reviewing articles is a task that is best done by experienced editors. I notice that your contributions only started earlier this month. I recommend you avoid reviewing articles until you gain more experience. Wait until you have made at least a few hundred substantial edits spread out over several months and over many types of articles, then read the then-current reviewing instructions and other materials available at WP:WikiProject Articles for creation. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 03:52, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I moved both of them back to AFC and declined one as a duplicate. Another experienced reviewer will take a look at the second submission. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 04:12, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Information icon Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

  1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
  2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:48, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Showing redirects on Help:Wiki markup[edit]

In case you don’t watch the page, I’ve posted a question on Help talk:Wiki markup concerning the redirect examples. Your input is more than welcome. —Frungi (talk) 18:01, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Kinkreet~♥moshi moshi♥~ 23:34, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI discussion concerning your Talk signature[edit]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding your signature’s continuing lack of links to your user page or talk page. The thread is User:QM400032’s signature contains no links. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frungi (talk • contribs) 02:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, unsigned, that’s ironic. But I thought the {{ANI-notice}} template would add the signature, like many talkpage templates do.
Anyway, an admin replied to that thread with strong words, so I strongly recommend fixing your signature as soon as possible. —Frungi (talk) 02:58, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • To put it simply, WP:Signature says you must include a link to either your user page, talk page or contribs page in your signature. It is not optional, at least one must be chosen or you open yourself up to a block. I've seen it happen more than once before. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 15:57, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Editnotice userpage[edit]

I see that you have {{Editnotice userpage}} here on this user talk page. ("Hello. You're editing the userpage of QM400032. Please make your edits friendly as this is a userpage and is only supposed to be edited by QM400032!")

However, {{Editnotice userpage}} is only supposed to be used on a user page, not a user talk page. Since user talk pages are supposed to have other people editing them, the template does not belong on a user talk page, and I recommend that you remove it from this user talk page. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 14:13, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I just noticed your editnotice, which a. isn't very friendly and b. makes a completely incorrect claim about what supposedly happens to vandals. I am going to edit that notice since it gives a false impression and can be very off-putting to inexperienced editors who happen to come by here. Drmies (talk) 01:54, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It just so happens that no one has yet vandalized the page and it's a time period setting I could use for vandals who ever threaten me. But still, please tell me why it's astonishing!QM400032 (talk) 02:03, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
1. Change your signature. You were given plenty of notice and you still haven't.
2. You do not set the terms for blocks, and saying someone will be blocked for 3 months or 3 years shows an amazing lack of clue. That isn't the reason you were blocked, but it is inappropriate and I support both the block and the modification to your editnotice.
3. To say "No one has vandalize my page" and attribute it to that notice is silly and again shows a lack of clue. You might as well say "I stuck a banana in my ear to keep the sun from exploding, and so far it works!". Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 02:10, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
First off, you are not an administrator. You do not have the power to block another editor. You do not have the authority to make sweeping statements about blocking other people, or setting the block duration. Second, even if you were an administrator, your actions would be limited by policies like WP:INVOLVED as to whether or not you could block another editor for vandalism to your user pages. Third, Making such statements is not appropriate, and the tone is offputting to other editors coming here to discuss topics with you. Imzadi 1979 → 05:24, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The claim is “astonishing” because you do not have the power to block people, not even vandals. I don’t believe WP’s blocking policy even specifies a duration between 24 hours and indefinite, let alone a “minimum of three months” for vandalizing a user talk page. Hopefully, this and the other answers above clarify things for you. —Frungi (talk) 05:25, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User has been blocked[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for failure to adjust your signature so it complies with our policies. See section above and ANI thread. Once your signature is adjusted the block can be lifted. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Drmies (talk) 01:51, 26 May 2013 (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).

QM400032 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Inability to link signatures QM400032 (talk) 02:13, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Then delete your preference for that signature and use the default signature. Linking isn't optional, excuses won't be considered. You will not be unblocked until you link, period. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 02:15, 26 May 2013 (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 have tried multiple times, only to experience the same glitch on my mobile device over and over. If you would like to help resolve this problem so you can request my unblock, please provide a question at Wikipedia talk:Signatures immediately after you read this.

Dennis, does QM need to be unblocked to change their sig? Drmies (talk) 02:18, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have verified that a blocked user can change their preferences, via my blocked doppelganger User:DennisBrown. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 18:10, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would assume that a blocked user can change their signature.

QM400032, if you want to be unblocked, but you're just not sure how to fix your signature, do the following:

  • Click on "preferences" at the top of any page
  • In the "Signature" section, clear what's in the text entry box. If you have trouble copying and pasting with your device, skip the next two steps. If you're able to copy and paste, perform the next two steps to get a signature that looks the same as your current one, but is valid, with links to your user page and talk page.
  • Copy the following code and paste it in the box:
[[User:QM400032|<span style="background:lightgreen">QM</span><span style="background:#ddd">400032</span>]] [[User talk:QM400032|<span style="color:white"><span style="background:#006A4D">(ta</span><span style="background:#613418">lk)</span></span>]]
  • Make sure the "Treat the above as wiki markup" box is checked
  • Click on the "Save" button
  • Come back to this page and submit a new request: {{unblock|reason=Explain that you now have a valid signature. Be sure to include the following four tildes: ~~~~}}
  • (Note to admin: when verifying this, if the user changes the above code to only include the talk page link, be sure to check the Wikicode, since the link will not be active on this page.) MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 08:53, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

QM400032 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Good news! I was finally able to fix my signature! What do you think? QM400032 (talk) 20:23, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

I see the code does exist in your signature, but not for the word talk. I'm going to go ahead and unblock you with the instruction of either removing the word (talk) in your sig, or linking that portion as well, as to not cause confusion. Your choice, either is fine. Staying unblocked requires this. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 00:58, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • My own personal view is that although the word "talk" is present, it's entirely unlinked, so is misleading: the talk page link is actually on the characters "400032". --Redrose64 (talk) 20:54, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • A massive improvement, but if you’re going to include both links as part of your username, why include the nonfunctional word “talk” afterward? —Frungi (talk) 22:34, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • That actually is because the you're currently at my talk page, which is why you sound misled. QM400032 (talk) 00:38, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Erm, no…
    [[User:QM400032|QM]][[User talk:QM400032|400032]] (talk)
    (Formatting removed for clarity.) The userpage and talk links split your username. The unlinked “(talk)” serves no purpose and, as said above, is even misleading. —Frungi (talk) 02:55, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    And I just noticed that Dennis’s unblocking comment addresses this as well. So I think that makes three people advising you to fix that. —Frungi (talk) 03:08, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and one more thing: if you understand that I fixed my signature, please contact Drmies and Dennis Brown using {{whisperback}} and tell them I finally fixed my signature. Include this exact link: User talk:QM400032#User has been blocked. QM400032 (talk) 00:48, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help me[edit]

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.
QM400032 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
2602:304:7918:2279:8580:cb94:b6bc:a31 (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by QuestionMark400056. The reason for QuestionMark400056's block is: "Abusing multiple accounts; ..."

Decline reason: Your block is for sockpuppetry, not an autoblock. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 11:49, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are suspected of sock puppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Greenday25. Thank you. Redrose64 (talk) 08:14, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, this happened long ago because someone added two new accounts to my server, then I was unable to edit my own talk page. Now someone else used one of the two infinitely blocked users on my IP address. This is why I asked for backup. QM400032 (talk) 12:40, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Right. "This happened" by divine intervention? "someone added"--not you? "added accounts to my server"--what does that even mean? No. Drmies (talk) 13:11, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Some strange friends of mine; they wanted their own accounts and have no Internet access, so they used it on mine. Boy, was that the biggest mistake I ever made! QM400032 (talk) 13:44, 27 May 2013 (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).

QM400032 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Accidental use of user whose block reason is: "Abusing multiple accounts: See Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry investigations/Greenday25" QM400032 (talk) 13:44, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Sorry, your explanation seems like nonsense. I would suggest honesty may be more useful here. Kuru (talk) 14:36, 27 May 2013 (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).

QM400032 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This really IS what happened. QuestionMark400056 has been using my IP address. QM400032 (talk) 21:04, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I'm sorry, but I simply can not believe that two people whose only connection is that they happened to use the same IP address would independently choose such strikingly similar user names. To be unblocked, I think you will need to give us a significantly better explanation of the relationship between you. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:14, 30 May 2013 (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.

Because you're the same person! Please see WP:BROTHER. --Rschen7754 21:24, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)Unfortunately, this kind of thing (brothers or friends using your computer) really does happen from time to time. I've seen it happen with my own (virtual) eyes and evidence obtained much later strongly suggested that the person was telling the truth, it was a family member.
Unfortunately, troublesome users claiming that this is what happened also happens far too often.
This kind of thing doesn't just happen in Wikipedia but in "real life" as well. Imagine what would happen if you let your brother or friend use your computer and they did something seriously illegal (e.g. make credible-sounding threats of violence) and the police found out about it. Your good name might eventually be cleared, but you would be naive to think you'd be able to escape a trip to jail and having your computers confiscated, and you likely wouldn't get your computers back.
Assuming you are being on the level, I'm sorry this happened to you, but I would suggest you have a far more serious issue than being the subject of a block. Namely, you have a friend or acquaintance who probably does not deserve your trust. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 22:37, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Assuming you don't get unblocked here, your other choice is WP:BASC. You might also read WP:GAB. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 22:52, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't help being curious: Who is QuestionMark400056 to you, how did he get on your IP address, and why are your usernames so very similar? Credible answers to these questions, I imagine, would likely help your unblock request. —Frungi (talk) 03:47, 28 May 2013 (UTC) As mentioned in the most recent decline. —Frungi (talk) 15:36, 30 May 2013 (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).

QM400032 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Listen, tell Rschen7754 that if I get unblocked, I'll do anything I can to delete the accused accounts as quickly as possible. * If you're willing to unblock me, first contact Rschen7754 (use{{whisperback}}) exactly what I said, then unblock me. * If you AREN'T willing to unblock me, please first ask Rschen7754 for an expiry time. QM400032 (talk) 22:06, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Per discussion below — Daniel Case (talk) 15:34, 5 June 2013 (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.

  • At this stage, I would suggest that the minimum you need to do is tell us honestly about your connection to User:QuestionMark400056 and any other accounts that you have connections with - if you don't do that, I really can't see anyone unblocking you. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:21, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with Boing. This isn't about appeasing any individual admin, it is about trust by the community. That trust was broken by you, and it can only be restored by your actions. Dennis Brown / 2¢ / © / @ 23:59, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would've also agreed. I'll tell you what's been happening.

QuestionMark400056 was my original account, but then I forgot the password. So I decided to use a new account. Unfortunately, I didn't know the real dangers of sockpuppetry, and I'm trying to delete the accounts. Actually, that's where I'll need your help. Do you know how to delete user accounts? I'll need to delete TWO accounts (the other account, Greenday25, is one I also forgot the password to). Could someone help me with that? I accept full responsibility, and I'll appreciate your help greatly.
QM400032 (talk) 20:17, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very skeptical about this - you forgot your password twice? --Rschen7754 20:19, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not kidding about it – I'm really not. QM400032 (talk) 20:23, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Accounts can't be deleted though, for legal and licensing issues. They could be renamed under the auspices of the right to vanish, but some account has to remain. All of the edits made under those accounts have to be attributed to some name according to the Creative Commons license we use here. Imzadi 1979 → 21:23, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The story keeps changing. Above you said "This really IS what happened. QuestionMark400056 has been using my IP address" now you are saying you are that person but lost your password twice. My troll sense is tingling and I'm wondering why I haven't revoked talk page access. If someone else does, they wouldn't hear a peep from me. Dennis Brown / 2¢ / © / @ 22:58, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • And he's also been block evading, see the IP posted on my talk page. --Rschen7754 23:04, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitrary break June 5 2013[edit]

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).

QM400032 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This is only because my brother used QuestionMark400056 without my permission, and I was autoblocked, then infinitely blocked. Also, if you're part of this discussion, please copy the following template:
{{you have mail}}
QM400032 (talk) 18:43, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Per further obfuscation and discussion below. Since talk page access has been revoked, this conversation can serve no further purpose. — Daniel Case (talk) 01:59, 6 June 2013 (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.

  • Let me be sure I understand: So your 3rd story is that your little brother did it? Dennis Brown / 2¢ / © / @ 19:01, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • There IS no second or third story. ALL the stories have at LEAST one connection. QM400032 (talk) 20:03, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I forgot to mention: He didn't actually MEAN it. He's already apologized. In fact, I already made my parents and siblings promise not to use my IP address without permission. QM400032 (talk) 20:06, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • A technical comment: In most households, the entire household shares one IP address. Unless you are paying two separate ISP bills or you are paying for more than 1 IP address, the only way to prevent others from using "your IP address" is for you to be the only Internet user in your house. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 20:15, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Of course, but here's where it gets complicated. Read carefully; you may miss something.
I'm an only user on Wikipedia. I don't want people to share my IP address. Then my brother uses it when I'm not around, then I'm angry. Then I get indefinitely blocked. I've been trying to get unblocked ever since.
QM400032 (talk) 20:22, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I still contend that if anyone else in your house uses Wikipedia from your home network, they will be using "your" IP address. I realize they've promised not to, but I also realize people break promises and you may have a houseguest over sometime in the next few months that uses Wikipedia on "your" network without your knowledge. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 22:34, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • A technical comment to QM400032: The term in indefinite not infinite. It's an easy mistake to make, I've misread it as "infinite" myself. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 20:11, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's what I mean, right? Don't these issues require an expiry time (in case it wasn't the user's fault)? QM400032 (talk) 20:13, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Indefinite blocks have no built in expiration time but they can be lifted at any time by anyone with the authority and technical means to do so (which in your case, means any administrator). Whether and when they will be lifted depends largely on the totality of the circumstances. If I were an administrator watching this discussion, I would be very reluctant to lift any block for 6-12 months at a minimum, or much longer if there was any future evidence of block evasion. By the way, there are some types of indefinate blocks that are typically lifted quickly. For example, a block for violating WP:Username policy is typically set at "indefinite" but if the user changes his username immediately it may be lifted withing hours or even minutes. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 20:23, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • If you can, could you please find an administrator you trust? After all, I have nominated all other accused accounts for vanishing. QM400032 (talk) 20:27, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I have removed your talkpage access. You have made enough unblock requests at this time. --Rschen7754 20:35, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • QM400032: I realize you won't be able to reply to this (and please don't try to contact me by email - I have it enabled for automatic messages and communication with administrators) but I did want to reply to your request to "please find an administrator you trust:" By default, I trust all administrators to act within reason and in good faith (those who abuse their admin powers are typically called to account for it by other admins or by other editors). I don't necessarily trust a single administrator to never make mistakes but multiple administrators have commented on this page and the consensus is clear: Your block should stand, at least for the near-term future. I STRONGLY recommend you wait at least 6 months before requesting an unblock, but ONLY if 1) you are no longer living in the same house as your sibling(s) or BOTH 2a) they have matured significantly and are no longer the kind of person who will even inadvertently do something that will cause you trouble AND 2b) they have no interest in editing Wikipedia and preferably no interest in reading it (if they read it, they may be tempted to fix typos). I not so strongly recommend that you let that 6 months become at least a year, and spend that year doing some other hobby. Now, I take it from the tone of your postings that you are either a young adult living with your parents or you are still in school (please don't confirm one way or the other, it's irrelevant). People under 20 generally mature a lot in any given 12-month period, much more so than people over, say, 30. I hope if you come back in mid-2014 or later, you will become a productive editor and a valued asset to the community. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 22:54, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, QM400032. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation#"c" parameter.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Arizona State Route 3 concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Arizona State Route 3, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 02:22, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Keep-calm-and-take-your-time-9.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Keep-calm-and-take-your-time-9.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:25, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:QM400032&oldid=1092090526"