User talk:Wikipedian1337

Welcome!
Hi Wikipedian1337! I noticed your contributions 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:

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:

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

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Kj cheetham (talk) 08:57, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Edge LiveAid.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Edge LiveAid.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Edge LiveAid.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Edge LiveAid.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:16, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

June 2021
Hello, I'm MichaelMaggs. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, James Clerk Maxwell, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. '' Neither the Wikipedia category he is in, nor that of any other person, counts as a Reliable Source. If you consider he's known for his mathematics outside the already-listed area of mathematical physics, plese add the source'' MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:54, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Renaming
Your reinstatement of the request and the rationale you've provided looks like trolling, whether you think so or not. I advise you to drop it, and to resist the urge to make plays on words that incorporate racial insults. You're very close to losing editing privileges.  Acroterion   (talk)   00:31, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

you sit there and watch this, how is this not an abuse of power? am i doing anything truly 'disruptive' on my ip talk page? i am merely voicing a well-sourced opinion that is supported by the website's own wikipedia page! this is madness! one of the admins needs to step in an evaluate this situation impartially. i'm dumbfounded — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipedian1337 (talk • contribs) 02:27, 13 August 2021 (UTC)


 * If you don't see how logging out to post as an IP that you think users are foolish and of obviously low intelligence then perhaps you need to address that before you resume editing here. Frankly 72 hours was lenient for inappropriate use of an alternate account to perform personal attacks. Often users with so few edits who engage in that sort of behavior get indefinitely blocked, keep it up and that is what will happen. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 02:29, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

so few edits? have you seen what my IP has contributed? this is just one IP. if i made a list it would put most to shame.
 * that part is fine, the ban bit. but removing my talk page access and threatening an indef if i choose to voice a fair position?
 * it's not like i'm advocating anything radical here. he did it because i'm maintaining a FAIR position!

i am just shocked you're sitting there and doing nothing. the ban, fine. but the escalating revocation of talk page privileges? for what? none of what i added there was disruptive. further, are you suggesting that because i'm editing as an IP user that i am subject to even greater punishment? it seems so? i didn't "log out". i barely use the account (only when i have to for things like uploading pictures, etc). i want to bring this to the administrators-at-large but i don't know how. i know i have to wait until i'm unbanned, but i want this to be decided by a "panel" with your "chief justice" (lol) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipedian1337 (talk • contribs) 02:35, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. 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:.  Acroterion   (talk)   02:48, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

August 2021
 Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. ([ block log] • [ active blocks] • [ global blocks] • [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/autoblock/?user=&project=en.wikipedia.org autoblocks] • contribs • deleted contribs • [ abuse filter log] • [ creation log] • change block settings • [ unblock] • [ checkuser] ([ log]) )

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 02:49, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Since you are using your unblock request to carry on with personal attacks I am revoking talk page access. I will leave your current appeal here for another admin to review. After than you have go to UTRS. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 02:50, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

UTRS 46799
has been closed. Quite, quite closed. -- Deep fried okra ( talk ) 23:50, 14 August 2021 (UTC)


 * I thought I'd respond to your email here. I can't reopen a closed UTRS ticket.


 * You are always ensured a fair hearing on UTRS. The appeals and their circumstances are always considered.


 * In all honesty, I agree with Deepfriedokra on this. I think you need to drop it on this occasion. You may not be meaning your new name in a racist way. However, if it can be taken offensively then it won't be allowed.


 * I would forget about it. Take some time out from Wikipedia. You might also like to read WP:SO 5 albert square (talk) 21:23, 15 August 2021 (UTC)


 * The IP is also CU-blocked along with a sockpuppet account recently created. The username issue was only one aspect of why the account and IP are blocked, there was a broad set of issues with conduct and personal attacks, not to mention logging out.  Acroterion   (talk)   22:06, 15 August 2021 (UTC)


 * In response to your last email, I also can't do anything about User: Contribhistorynazi. That is a CheckUser block.


 * I'll give you my honest opinion, that is to let it drop. You emailing me again once I posted my last response here it's coming across as you refusing to accept my advice. I've checked your blocks and they're all correct from what I can see. Yes you're allowed more than one account in certain circumstances but not to evade a block and that account could be viewed as being created for that reason.


 * You've said that you won't contact ArbCom, I don't have any further advice to offer other than what I've already said 5 albert square (talk) 00:11, 16 August 2021 (UTC)