User talk:James The Bond 007/Archive 1

Hey
Welcome to Wikipedia! I saw at the Teahouse that you're looking for someone to adopt you. Hopefully you'll find someone soon. In the mean time, if you run into any issues or have questions or anything specific on-wiki you'd like to learn, feel free to ask me and I'll try to point you in the right direction. I'd offer to adopt you, but I'm far too prone to randomly disappearing from Wikipedia for weeks or months at a time, so that wouldn't be fair to you. (Helping you while I happen to be around, on the other hand, shouldn't be a problem). Have a nice day, AddWitty NameHere  00:36, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * P.S. One thing that might help in getting someone to adopt you is placing the adopt me template on your talk page. Means you'll be added to, making it easier for folks looking to adopt a new editor to find you. AddWitty  NameHere  00:44, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Yup, just like that. :) (Do you have any preference for me responding on your talk page or keeping the conversation in a single location--either your talk page or mine? Any of those options work for me, so whatever's easier for you. :) AddWitty  NameHere  01:05, 3 December 2019 (UTC))
 * Whoops, didn't look carefully enough. My fault, sorry. You seem to have accidentally substituted rather than transcluded the template. In any case, I have now fixed it for you and you should be showing up in the category soon. :) As for adopting, hm... I still don't think it'd be ideal, but it also depends a bit on what areas you are looking for help in. If they're either basics or specific areas I'm pretty familiar in, I'm willing to at least consider it. If they're wildly different from what I'm used to doing on wikipedia, it's probably better to wait for someone who has more clue about those specific areas.  AddWitty  NameHere  01:32, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Anyway, like I asked above, what type of help are you looking for in an adopter? AddWitty  NameHere  01:55, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Adoption
I have done soem "adoptive' mentoring in the past, and would be willign to give it a try again with you. I would ask:


 * what are your general goals on Wikipedia?
 * What kinds of issues do you think you want or need help with?
 * How much effort do you expect to put into editing, and how much contact/oversight do you want from an adopter?

You can take a look at my user page and my edits and see if you think I would be the sort of mentor you would like. Please ping me with your response, or place a talk back on my user page. Thank you. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 02:36, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Gumshoos Pokemon
Welcome to Wikipedia! Now I'm a big Pokemon fan as you can tell, but is your name by any means related to the pokemon Gumshoos? I was just curious about it and I don't mean to be personal about. Porygon-Z (talk) 23:34, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh! You are to?! That makes the two of us! Also it makes sense that gumshoos is based on a gumshoe, since he likes to play detective! Porygon-Z (talk) 13:44, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I know right! It's either I need more good information/sources or I'm just not good at writing articles. Then again I have no idea how to edit! Maybe you can help me?Porygon-Z (talk) 22:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh, what's that? Great! So I've tried to publish it, and they keep denying it because they claim it needs more evidence and it needs to be a good article in order to be spun off. I don't know how to do that. Porygon-Z (talk) 12:34, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh thanks! I've been trying to get accept so I hope it works! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Porygon-Z474 (talk • contribs) 12:06, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh my fluff! Thank you so much! It's about time for Porygon to have its own page, don't you think? Now about its evolutions........ Porygon-Z (talk) 03:50, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Damn. Well it'll just have to take time. Can I see the final result, please? UB Blacephalon (talk) 03:58, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Subjects and a suggestion
Hi. When you add a new section to a talk page, it is helpful if you use a short, descriptive title that summarizes the subject of your post. This usually avoids duplicate section names (which are bad), and helps others when they look at page histories, search, etc.

I wanted to say that I'm pleased to see a young person that is interested in contributing to the world, writing complete sentences, etc. If you are interested in Pokemon, as you appear to be, I'm sure that working on those articles, and any others, will be rewarding for both you and Wikipedia. If I may offer some advice, try to do more of that, and leave administrative matters to the more experienced editors and admins. While it's certainly good to fix vandalism when you see it, focusing on the negative aspects of the project can lead to "burn-out" and disillusionment, and is ultimately not very satisfying work. I.e., it is better to create than destroy, if you can. Also, even if you have the best intentions, it can look odd to other editors when a newbie wants to administer others without gaining the experience needed to fully understand the environment.

I don't see anything wrong with your username, BTW. It's creative, unique, and apparently meaningful. Change it if you like, but note that your editing history follows the rename, but existing signatures to talk pages will not, which can be kind of confusing to others.

I hope this helps, and cheers! —[ Alan M 1 (talk) ]— 21:13, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

EC and article edits
I tend to agree with Cullen, that the articela bout the middle east, one of the more controversial areas oin Wikipedia, are not a wise choice for an inexperienced editor. I would however, hope that you can do more article editing -- i see in your contributions lots of edits to your own user space, and lots in other people's user talk, but relatively little in article space or article talk space. Is there any topic are you are at all intersted in beyond the Middle East? I cna perhaps suggest soem articles that would repay attention in a ny given topic area, or some tasks that could be undertaken as a way to gain experience. Tell me if either idea appeals to you. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:54, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

I added a template to your user page marking the adoption. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:54, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Congrats!
Congrats on the new name change! If you have any questions about anything, ping me and I'll try to help you out the best I can! UB Blacephalon (talk) 17:54, 16 December 2019 (UTC) Thanks for the Barnstar! I really appreciate it! UB Blacephalon (talk) 14:00, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Note
Hi James The Bond 007, I'm Primefac. You'll likely not be pleased about this but I have removed some of your edits because they reveal too much personally identifiable information about you. We have a policy of protecting editors' safety by hiding such information if they share it. I'm really sorry about having to suppress your edits, and I know it's annoying, but it's for the best. Please don't re-add the information. For some useful information on privacy and safety, you can take a look at Guidance for younger editors and On privacy, confidentiality and discretion. Thank you, and sorry for messing about with your edits! Primefac (talk) 14:52, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

IS CRISMA!
  "And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,  I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.  For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord." Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version) UB Blacephalon (talk) is wishing you a  Merry Christmas. This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove. Spread the cheer by adding to their talk page with a friendly message.

UB Blacephalon (talk) 17:10, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

~ hint ~
Here is a template you can use on your Draft:Porygon Pokemon article ~  edit it right above   and it will straighten out all your dates in your References section ~mitch~ (talk) 00:33, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Headings in the Teahouse
Hi JTB007, I notice that you have been asking some questions in the Teahouse – I wonder if I could ask you to use more descriptive headings when you do that? It's really helpful to people who look at the table of contents for the Teahouse, if the headings say something about what's in the section. It doesn't have to be more than a few words, like "Question about Twinkle badge" for instance, just as long as it sets the section apart from the rest, and gives a hint to what the question is about. (You don't need to go back and change the headings for the sections you have already started, this is just a gentle request for the future.) Thanks! --bonadea contributions talk 17:46, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

December 2019
Hello, I'm Izno. An edit that you recently made to MissingNo. seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want to practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Izno (talk) 13:53, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The use of tools to enable WP:CSD is serious. If you misuse them, you be blocked. --Izno (talk) 13:55, 20 December 2019 (UTC)


 * You are quickly headed to a block. What on earth would compel you to tag a FEATURED ARTICLE for deletion?! I suggest you respond to these concerns otherwise I will be starting an ANI thread and requesting a block. Praxidicae (talk) 14:02, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I got a message on my talk page. I think we're fine here for now. --Izno (talk) 14:09, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not do on User talk:Praxidicae. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. —— SN  54129  14:34, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Praxidicae (talk) 14:39, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. 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:. 331dot (talk) 14:50, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Please unblock me, I promise this won't happen again, I want just 1 extra chance. --Sir Bond 007 (James The Bond 007) (talk) 14:55, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Someone else will review your request. You should state what it is that you want to do if unblocked.  So far, you have made few if any contributions to the encyclopedia and the rest of your postings have, frankly, been more trouble than they are worth and waste the time of other volunteer editors who must clean up after you. 331dot (talk) 15:01, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

I know my edits are stupid, but what are the chances I will be unblocked? --Sir Bond 007 (James The Bond 007) (talk) 15:04, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The chances of you being unblocked are very low, close to zero, unless you can do as I asked above. Saying that you know your "edits are stupid" doesn't help your cause. 331dot (talk) 15:08, 20 December 2019 (UTC)


 * James, I will be reviewing the reasons why you were blocked later today, and will place some advice for you. I am not sure if you will be unblocked. I am involved here, and cannot do an unblock myself. I strongly urge you to reveiw all the warnings above, and the edits linked at Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents (while blocked you cannot edit there, but can read and follow links) and think over very closely what you have done on Wikipedia, and what you want to do and why. You might also want to reread my suggested work topics to you from a few days ago. Unless you can persuade other admins that you are likely to be a net positive for the project in future, an unblock is not likely. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:32, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

you mean like this?


 * That's not what I was looking for but it's also not a bad list. It's clear you're trying. James I think you might have benefitted from waiting to post the next unblock request until you'd had a chance to work a little more with . I think he might be able to help you turn that into something that can get accepted. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:58, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

could you help me make an unblock request? — Preceding unsigned comment added by James The Bond 007 (talk • contribs) 10:26, December 20, 2019 (UTC)
 * I can an will send you a message describing what you need to cover in an unblock request, and what you will need to do differently in future if you are unblocked. I have it outliend in my mind, but I will not be able to write it out properly for about another 3-4 hours. But i absolutely will do so before I sleep tonight. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:25, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I got a notification that you ahd sent me email, but I have not yet received the email itself. If it was jsut to alert me to this situation, I know of it and do not need to be further informed. If there was more and you want it to be private, please resend. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:25, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Some friendly advice
Hey again. I'm sad to see you got blocked, though looking at the edits you got blocked for, I can understand it. Going by some of your responses above, I'm pretty sure you can, too. That's good, because that's an important first step: knowing and admitting what you did wrong.

That said, although I'm not an administrator, I'd like to give you some friendly advice: be patient. Yes, getting blocked sucks. However, rushing impatiently into unblock requests is only going to waste people's time, making them less, not more likely to be willing to unblock you.

Instead, please, please take a step back, go do something else for a while (maybe play a game, get your holiday homework out of the way or read a book?), and wait until your mentor DESiegel has had the time to look into things and give you some advice. Then, once DESiegel has given you that advice, listen to them and work with them on how to handle things. AddWitty NameHere  19:14, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

thank you for the advice, it's happy to hear some comforting words : ) --Sir Bond 007 (James The Bond 007) (talk) 19:23, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * To that end James you might want to remove the second unblock request until you can finish working with DES. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 19:33, 20 December 2019 (UTC)


 * At this point it is probably not a good idea to remove anything, but you could strike it or perhaps bette yet just post a note that you will be making an improved unblock later, and any reviewing admin can wait. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:27, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Striking would have been the better suggestion to removal, I agree. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Your actions, a possible unblock, and procedures going forward.
First of all I want to apologize for not getting this message written sooner. I ahd intended to be writing this yesterday, but some work and personal things took longer than I had expected, and this is too important for me to be willing to do it when I was rushed or to tired to concentrate properly.

Your actions
You have engaged in a numberof actions which are unaceptabel, and others whgich are unwise and have harmed your reputation, the combination leading to the current block. These nactiuons include:


 * 1) Here you attacked another user, and failed to assume good faith
 * 2) Here you moved an articel to the project (wikipedia) space (where no articles belong) while engaged in a dispute over that article.
 * 3) Here you post in aggressive toens, and in all caps, ehich is usually treated as the online counterpart mof yelling.
 * 4) Here you excuse a personal attack with . You mut understand that such attackes, even when growing out of the anger of the moment, are never accewptable, althoguh deliberate malicious attacks are worse.
 * 5) Here while apparantly attemptign tom apologize yoiu continue to attack another user, and a living person, ontrary to the policy about living people.
 * 6) Here you tell another user who is trying to help out to "keep your nose out" of a dispute. You need to understand that Wikipedia is a collaberative project, and that other users may and will intervene and try to deal with problems, and have a right to do so.
 * 7) Here you apparently attempted to opena sock puppet investigation, without proper evidence and without understanding the procedurs used in such matters.
 * 8) Here you accuse a user of acting as a Sock Puppet, without good evidence. (Althoguh to be fair it is not always obvious the basis on whioch experienced editos make such accusations, particualarly it may not be obvious to a relativly new editor.
 * 9) [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cullen328&diff=prev&oldid=930627122 here you ask for Extended Confirmed (EC) status longh before meeting the requirements. You apaprently did not understand that such exceptiosn are almost never made, and that EC status is intented to bhe limited to thjose editors who have demonstrated a degree of maturity and control which allows them to edit in highly contentious situations without cusign additional problems (Even so, many of them do not manage this.) This was understandable, but unwise.
 * 10) Here you 'warn" an editor about "disruptive editing" when what the editor did was to coamplain n(in an impolite way, granted) about your delivery of an unsolicited religious Christmas message.
 * 11) Here you gave the same user a level 3 vandalism warning. You need to ahve a better understandign of what is and is not vandalism before isuing such warnings.(However, you did later apologize here.)
 * 12) Hwere however, you made what seems to eb a positive edit to an article.
 * 13) Here you apologize for an earlier revert, which was a good thing to do.
 * 14) Here you ask for admisison to the CVU training, alhtoguh you knew you dd not qualify by edit count. Perhaps you did nopt understand that Cv work generally requires some experience and understanding of Wikipedia policies, because false accusations can harm feeligns and drive would be good editors away.
 * 15) Here you tag for speedy deletion an articel under two criteria which clearly do not apply, not even arguably, to that article. You later described this as "testing" but you left the tags in place for over ten minutes without self-reverting, and they were then removed by an edit from an IP editor.
 * 16) here you tag a different article for speedy deletion with three different  criteria. Again, none applies. Again you leave the tags in place without self-reverting for over 10 minutes, and are reverted by an IP editor.
 * 17) here you again tag an articel (yet a third one) for speedy deletion under 4 different criteria, none of whih apply. You leave the tags in place until an experiendced editor and admin removes them, about 8 mi9nutes later. You did not self-rtevert, adn this article was actually a [[WP:FA|Featured Article] Thias makes the disruption more severe. You need to understand that speedy deletion is a seriosu matter, and is not to be experimented with, except perhaps in nyour own user space, and even there any tests should be promptly self-reverted.
 * 18) Here whewn warned that your actiosn in the above speedy deletion tags were inappropraite, you tell the warnign user to "bud out", althoguh the waring was absolutely legitimate mand not uncivil. Thiosmlead directly to your current block.

Please consider each of thewse indicents. If you do not understand the problems with each of the, ping me from this page, indicatijng the item(s) you do not understand, and I will try to explain further. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:06, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

A possible unblock
You need to reveiw the actions listed above, and the others mentione in the ANI Thread, and come to an understanding of why they were not appropraite. Then you need to come to a clear understanding of why and how these actiuons were not apropriate. You need to understand that while Wikipedia editing cvan be very enjoyable, and should not be a chore, it is not a game, and is a serious beuisness. It may be that you are not ready to undertake it, or do not chosoe to contiunue. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:06, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

If you do want to continuse, you need to compose a new unblock request below, explining in detail, and in your own words, what you did that you should not have, and what kinds of positivve contributions you intend to make in future if you are unblocked. It may be that you will not be unblocked right away, even so, but you can then come back and ask again aftr several months. That will depend onj what a reviewing admin says. Make any unblock request sincere and detailed, althogh you do not need to address each separate incident above, and inded you should not try to address each. But you should identify the kinds of things represented aove, and indicate that you will not do such things in future. In particualr "testing" is not an acceptbel reason for disrupting article or another user's talk or user pages.

Do not just point to my examples, make any request in your own words stand on its own. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:06, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Procedures going forward
If you should be unblocked, I want you to agree to several restrictions. If you do not find these acceptable, then I am afraind I will have to withdraw as a mentor. If you include a promise to abide by these restrictions in an unblock request, it may help, but then an unblock might be made conditional on keeping that promise. Making that p[art mof your unblock requewst is up to you.


 * 1) Do not take any page outside your oen userspace for speedy deletion. If you think a page ought to be deleted, notify me, or if I am jot availalbe, post at the Teahouse or notify another expeerienced editor who has agreed to help myiou -- if there is one.
 * 2) Do not nominate any article for deletion at AfD. You may particuipate in AfD discussions, but you must notify me if you do so.  If you think an articel ought to be deleted at an AfD, notify me or another experiencd editor who has agreed to help you.
 * 3) Do not ask for extra prmisisons or privilages for the time being. When I think you cna handle such, i will lt you know, or you may ask another expriencd editor if you choose. But don't even ask for several months.
 * 4) Don't, for the time being, get involved on debates over Wikipedia policy.
 * 5) Don't, for the time being, try to monito other user's  behavior. If you enbcounter what seems to be improper behavior on the part of other users, notify me or another exprienced editor.
 * 6) Do try to concentrate on positive edits to the main article space, por on drafts intended to wind up in article space. (This includes discussiosn on article talk pages intended to help improve articels.) I want to see atn least 3/5ths of your edits being to articles, article talk pages, or drafts or draft talk pages.
 * 7) If you make any mistake, self-revert as soon as you realize it. Then notify me.
 * 8) If you have any problems or questions, ping me to the page where the issue arose promptly, or its talk page if it is an article or draft. You may also notiy anothe experinced user if you choose.
 * 9) Expect me to monitor your edits more closely than before.

I will review these from time to time, and will lift restrictiosn as I feel you have demonstrated a level of editing experience and judgement that makes them unneeded. I will, if you wish, reveiw specificareas with yoiu in my or youruser space, particualrly deletion issues, so that the main project is not disrupted by practice.

Can you agree to accept the above restirctions? If you can, please post mto that effect. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:06, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!


-- Bank Bank Robbery started a robbery (🚨) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message. -- Bank Bank Robbery started a robbery (🚨) 06:36, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

at this point onward, I see no hope in being unblocked, so I must simply abandon my account, thanks to all who have helped me, specially DESiegel, and Blacephalon, I will never forget you --Sir Bond 007 (James The Bond 007) (talk) 16:06, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * James, i hiope you will choose to reconsider. I have seen editors who did use multiple accounts in ways clearly in violation of policy unblocked. That is apparently what Tony and other checkusers believe you have done. I don't know if that is true -- I have been fooled before into making a detailed defense of an editor who denied such an accusation, only to have the editor admit it after I had argued the case at length. Checkusers can be mistaken, but often they are not. If you have ever edited while not logged in, or under another account, perhaps believing that it was for an acceptable reason, or on a friend's account, say, I urge you to say so. If you did not do anything like that, of course you should not lie about it.
 * In any case, I wish you well. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:26, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * There is always hope in being unblocked, if you are honest and upfront with us. DESiegel has given you excellent advice, you would do well to follow it. 331dot (talk) 16:28, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Maybe I will stay here for a bit, like DESiegel suggested, because I may have a slim chance of being unblocked, Thank you DESiegel! --Sir Bond 007 (James The Bond 007) (talk) 16:39, 22 December 2019 (UTC) Maybe they could be mistaken, because while right now I am editing from my personal IP, normally I edit from a school IP, which has many blocks, and warnings, due to vandalism, so they could have thought it is me. --Sir Bond 007 (James The Bond 007) (talk) 16:42, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

This is my school's IP address https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:207.172.72.50
 * Then I would suggest that you take some time to digest and respond to the good advice DESiegel gave you and perhaps the comment from the administrator that declined your last request, and once you do then you could make an unblock request. You may find it helpful to read this guide to appeals so you can write the best request you can.  A different administrator will review any request you make. Good luck 331dot (talk) 16:46, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I hope you do consider, read what has been presented and linked above, make a good unblock request, get unblocked, become a productive editor, and find this rewarding. I will be available if an unblock is granted, and any reviewing admin or checkuser should see what I posted here and in the ANI thread. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:05, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The few recent contribs from the IP mentioned above, all to their own talk page, are clearly not by this user, who is able to put words with lower-case letters together with punctuation to form real sentences, unlike the IP editor. I'm guessing there's more to it. Should the IP address be redacted? —[ Alan M 1 (talk) ]— 02:41, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Re: procedures going forward
Dear DESiegel, I agree to your terms, and will write an unblock request, after Tony, or Yunshui talks to me in detail about the aditional abuse, which wasn't by me, and I can only write the unblock, if I know why they blocked me, and why they suspected me of whatever abuse was caused. --Sir Bond 007 (James The Bond 007) (talk) 13:54, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The IP address 207.172.72.50 is currently blocked, and the block does not expire until 6 Feb 2019. I am not sure how much additional information, if any or  can give you, about your block. Any unblock request should be based on what you know to be true, what you have done in the past (and what you have not done) and what you will and will not do in the future, if unblocked. Do read (or re-read) Guide to appealing blocks. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:09, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Reblocked
Hi, because CheckUser evidence suggests additional abuse beyond the initial accounts that assumed good faith on, I have reblocked you as a CheckUser block. At this point in time, your best course of action is to email the Arbitration Committee at. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * James, I cannot see the logs that CheckUsers can, so I cannot evaluate this block, nor can I lift it. If you did indeed use multiple accounts in ways whach are (or even might be considered to be) a violation of Wikipedia policy, I urge you to openly admidt it, indicate your understanding to the policy, and agree not to repeat such actions. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 01:03, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

what additional abuse? --Sir Bond 007 (James The Bond 007) (talk) 12:53, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

could you please view the checkuser logs, and tell me what the additional abuse is? --Sir Bond 007 (James The Bond 007) (talk) 13:41, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

It seems pretty clear you don't want me on wikpedia, but before I leave I would like my account, and my contributions deleted, because I don't want to let the site keep my contributions, and will just keep putting ridiculous blocks on me!

WHy do you people think I am a vandal, name 1 good reason that would have suggested i'm a vandal! — Preceding unsigned comment added by James The Bond 007 (talk • contribs)
 * It's not true that "we don't want you" here; we want you to contribute according to policies and guidelines- in order to do that, you must demonstrate that you understand them by responding to the points given to you here on this page. Your edits will not(and cannot) be removed- when you make an edit to Wikipedia, you "irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL", as stated below the edit window of every page when you edit. Accounts cannot be deleted, only abandoned.  If you no longer wish to use Wikipedia, simply abandon your account. 331dot (talk) 15:53, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * You have never been blocked for vandalism. 331dot (talk) 15:54, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Yes i understand why is was blocked 2 days ago, but why am I blocked because of something else, because this is the only account I have made, and you can check my Ip, but why am I also blocked under sock puppetry, some thing doesn't add up :( --Sir Bond 007 (James The Bond 007) (talk) 16:00, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Checkuser evidence is not just based on IP address. I would suggest that you think carefully about if you have created any other accounts before this one, and- if you haven't- why we would think that you have, as you will need to address that if you want to make an unblock request. I'd also suggest that you review the points made above by . 331dot (talk) 16:05, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi sorry I am late writing this but what has he one to recieve so many blocks? UB Blacephalon (talk) 18:29, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Porygon concern
Hi there, I'm MDanielsBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Porygon, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 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. MDanielsBot (talk) 01:33, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Porygon


Hello, James The Bond 007. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Porygon".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)