User talk:1zeroate
 | Older warnings and/or other comments on this page have been removed, but are still viewable in the page history. |
Blocked
[edit]Hi there. I have blocked this account's editing privileges. If you were a newbie I would take a different tack, but I noticed you saying here that you have "years of experience" with MastCell, yet this account was only started recently. Do you have other named accounts? If you do you should stick to one account. If you merely mean you have edited as an IP then you should know better about how our project works. If you want another admin to review the block, please feel free to post {{unblock|your reason here}} but you should read WP:GAB first. --John (talk) 20:09, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
- Hello John, I mean to directly address your concerns here. I do not have other named accounts. I understand only the most basic things
about our project and I obviously have much to improve upon regarding my standards of communication and conduct on talk pages. I understand I have been doing it wrong by the concensus of many as laid out on many wiki pages. I hope that I will be unblocked and if you would like me to address any further concerns please do not hesitate to let me know. MayYourEditBeAwesome 05:52, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- This is an edit to make it known that Zad68 may most certainly reach out to me for discussion on my talk pages.It was wrong of me to ask
you not to do so. In multiple ways. My apoligies and since understand more wikiexpectations regarding condoct and standards, I hope to be able to edit together again soon. If I can address any of your further concerns, please do not heasitate to let me know and I shall do so
- This edit is to include and invite Loriendrew to leave any comment or edit any part of my talk page or any page on wikipedia. It was quite wrong of me to ask anything other wise. I will amend my errors if able. MayYourEditBeAwesome 15:04, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- This is an edit to include MastCell,Seppi333,Quadell,AndyTheGrump, and any and every other administrator who may of had the interesting
experience of dealing with me upto this point. I was under a wrong impression regarding my standards and conduct on the various pages of wikipedia here and on various articles here. My scope of interest may be unlimited but I am more inclined to stick with what I know. That said I understand I must go about it a better way. I do harbor many unchanged concerns however I do not intend to allow those concerns to compel me to act in the incorrect manner I had been. Their are many places I disagree with many folks and I desire to resolve and amend contested intention in a more acceptable manner. A better more proper manner becoming the guidelines and policies of wikipedia. If I can address any concerns on your ppart about me , don't hesitate to let me know. MayYourEditBeAwesome 07:22, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- This is an edit to include and address the concerns raised by JamesBWatson. My previous actions are undenablable innappropriat. That particular
edit you cite I am unsure about. The could of been my wife too. We were still legally married and living together at that time. Regardless of that factor I accept that it was not a good edit improvement. Further I readly admit that I have much room for improvment by looking at my past Pecident(sp) is against me. I want to convince anyone reading this that I am ready to show a higher level of respectful, polite , interaction on wikipedia . For as long as I am allowed the privlige to edit here. And hopefully expand the privlige back past my talk page. Also , I affirm by my Identity that I have recently shared , that, this is my one and only account. I do not desire to be a disruptor or vandaliser. If you have any concerns I and address or suggestions for me Please feel free to address me if you like. MayYourEditBeAwesome 06:53, 17 December 2013 (UTC)MayYourEditBeAwesome 06:55, 17 December 2013 (UTC)MayYourEditBeAwesome 06:57, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
1zeroate (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
My edits have not been disruptive,I have no idea why I am blocked. If we are not to bite the newbs heads off why start me off with a perm ban? I have edited here off and on over the years but my skills and know how are not on the level of professinal wikieditors. I am somewhere inbetween a newb and an old hand. I do go after easy edits more often. Things I know should not be challengeable. Like when I check the reference of Novocure on the FDA approval no where did I find the wording "last resort" to quote: "The device, manufactured by Novocure, is called the NovoTTF-100A System and is meant for adults with glioblastoma multiforme that recurs or progresses after chemotherapy and radiation treatment." so this means that the other stuff should be tried first but this does not imply that the novocure system is a "last resort" the words do not even appear as referenced. Such style of writing leads to give the read the idea that this is a modality to be avoided if possible as it is one of "last resort" according to the article. IN TRUTH it should always be included in chemo and radiation treatments because of the improved effectiveness it provides in conjuction with those modalities. But I am being strongly discouraged from pointing out netrual things like that. A small but prominent clique of wikieditors are working to target me personally and some of the kinds of articles I would work on. I try to stick to subjects I know. Occasionally I make mistake. If good faith is assumed then a permenate ban or indefinite ban seem egregiously over the top. I may want to advance knowledge on certain subjects but not at the cost of true , reliably sourced, and verified reliablity. If we can't prove it via 1st ,2nd,and 3rd sources then we do not have creditblity and lacking creditblity makes our word and/or the word of the article worthless and useless as a tool to help improve knowledge. Wikipedia is all about improving our knowledge base,Humanities knowldge base. We do this by working together and not against one another. Even though I feel many strains of oppistion I still understand the afor mentioned quality of collaboration .I'd like to be restored with my editing privliges and be given full faith that I am acting in good faith in aderence to the basic princables and philospohies of Wikipedia.
Decline reason:
As noted above your account of your own knowledge of Wikipedia policies (and as further evidenced by this TL;DR unblock request; thank God I realized there's an easier explanation for the block!) suggests you are not the newbie your edit history would want to suggest. So, as the blocking admin asked, what up with that? — Daniel Case (talk) 21:14, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict)/concurrance This user has not addressed the concerns of the blocking admin, even in a very long reply. Looking over the user's activity, it appears to be a single-purpose account with no interest in NPOV. Nearly all edits in article-space decrease the quality of the articles in question, and edits in non-article space make rambling and evidence-free accusations against other editors. I don't believe an unblock of this account would benefit Wikipedia in any way. – Quadell (talk) 21:19, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
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.
1zeroate (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
If I have acted out of turn I acknowledge that with the appeal to be allowed to correct any mistakes on my par.This is my only account.I do not sick.I do not cheat. I would like to be unblock by the Autoban because this is my only account. I gave up my anon status to formally register myself to enjoy the same privliges I used to enjoy as an anon editor. With that I am learning new things. Please note I am trying my best to do the right thing , follow instructions and prompts. I may not be accomplishing it all correctly but I am doing my upmost best to correctly follow instruction and particpate in a proper manner as expected by you and WIKIPIEDA. I want to play in your sandbox in the sand. I understand that I have to be nice to you and play by your rules. I may not understand everything but I !AFFRIM! that I am doing my best to play nice by the rules. I am completely willing to try even harder. If I have acted out of turn I acknowledge that with the appeal to be allowed to correct any mistakes on my par.This is my only account.I do not sick.I do not cheat. I would like to be unblock by the Autoban because this is my only account. I gave up my anon status to formally register myself to enjoy the same privliges I used to enjoy as an anon editor. With that I am learning new things TalkFirstThenEdit (talk) 22:07, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I have looked at the editing history of this account, the editing history of an IP address that you say you have used (and everything about the editing strongly suggests that you and only you have used it), and the editing history of another IP address that seems closely allied (it geolocates to the same area, it has edited the same pages, it has expressed the same opinions, it uses exactly the same idiosyncratic English). Unfortunately, while for the most part your statement "I am trying my best to do the right thing" seems valid, trying to do the right thing and doing the right thing are not the same. You edit contentiously, plugging a point of view and failing to take in the essence of what others say; you persist despite clear consensus against you; you make unsubstantiated accusations against other editors; your editing frequently contains non-sequiturs and failures to get the point; you sometimes either refuse or are unable to follow Wikipedia policies and guidelines; your English is often very poor, which doesn't matter much in talk pages, but it does in articles. I have also seen content you have added to articles which does not appear to be your own writing at all, suggesting copyright infringements, though I have been unable to find any sources to confirm that. Most of the problems seem to be caused by a lack of understanding of what you are doing, rather than any ill-intention, but there are occasional exceptions, such as this edit, which I find hard to see as anything other than vandalism, and there have been occasions where the two IP addresses I have referred to above have supported one another in discussion. It all adds up to the conclusion that, unfortunately, whatever your intentions, your contributions are not a net positive for the project. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:33, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
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.
last point
[edit]This is not a point. This is me in a box locked up. Having your digital essence on restriction is tough in every sense of the meaning. So I may even talk to myself being locked up on the talk page. If I did make any points I would like to know where score stands and what the rules are I don't mean to play games even if I am playful. Feel free to edit anything or address me with any concern or issue. I will gladly welcome any and all criticism and advice. I'm kinda wondering If I should read something old or something new? IF my text is taken as point making PLEASE feel free to correct it. Further addendum ; I also understand the current version of my talk page might seem a bit conspiratorial but that is only a present reflection of surface thought. I stand by everything said in this version https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:1zeroate&oldid=586660877 and I assure you that we are on each others team. I do not believe I can be indefinitely blocked forever nor do I believe any of my breaches are unforgivable. I am willing to learn , behave, accept any change or make any change. As well as will to wait although I do cringe when I see some folks with months and years of time on for editing"blunder". In the cyber universe time seems to take on a faster and slower realm. a Weeks worth of time is incredibly long.... a year is like a lifetime. of course I suppose I would take another route However, If I still have time I still remain curious. And so I wait to see what happens.MayYourEditBeAccurate 14:28, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Unblock request 3
[edit]1zeroate (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
My reason for request is so that I can clean up my user page, and continue editing in accordence with wikipedia guidelines and policies. I acknowledge my past unacceptable behavoir and affirm here that I will not continue in that vein again. At the same time I do not want to do a prison sentence of waiting time to be allowed to edit again.You pay nathiong to trust me, risk nothing to trust me. All I am asking is to have a little faith and trust in me and my word that I am being honest and well meaning with no intention to be a disruption ever again
Decline reason:
I remain unconvinced, and see no reason to unblock. No case has been made that there will be any benefit to Wikipedia if you are free to edit at will again. If you choose to re-request unblock, I strongly advise you to read the guide first, as you have already been instructed above. KillerChihuahua 19:33, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
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.
Unblock request 4
[edit]{{admin help}}
- Greetings KillerChihuahua
I shall re-read over the guidlines but I assure you that the guidelines have become part of my daily reading. That given could you point out some action I could further take to demonstrate my willingness to behave. If you are on my team and I am on your team then I very much would like to work together to make something better. Even if that means never touching subjects I have an interest in. So if their is anything I can do for you or the community to further this effort please do not hesitate to let me know and if I could get a suggestion other than "clean start" to demonstrate my willingness to be a team player by the rules and guidelines and policies of wikipedia I would do my beat to act in good faith by said suggested demonstration. I have a revert of a proper unblock request. But being locked up and doing time here in this talk pen I also have time to examine things and reflect. But if those reflections are counter productive or disruptive please edit them out or let me know so I can edit them out. Thank you MayYourEditBeAccurate 23:56, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- (Non-administrator comment) Since you are asking for advice, I will advise you that you should take the advice already given to you. I can tell that you have not read and fully understood the Guide. Pay careful attention the underlined words in the lede. ParacusForward (talk) 03:35, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you ParacusForward , Sometimes, I have to re-read some things many times to retain and demonstrate the true "spirit of intent" of the
words of our guidelines and policies , it is something that comes with understanding. As I begin to grasp a better understanding of many things I realize their must be some doubts as to my irredeemablity. The strong message of indefinite is pretty overwhelming upon first inclusion. Understandably many people must completely flip out. Upon being offered the clean slate option I could imagine a great many more opt for that as a means to an end. The end I seek is to be a meaningful, properly conductive , participant in this affair. This wikipedia. I shall read over the GaB again first off. By BRIEF I take that to mean my unblock request inside the request itself but I have wondered about all my extra words. I mean I really wonder why novocure must be lumped up next to snail massage. But even if their is nothing I can do about it I still want to be a part of this if the community would think it of merit to include me. If you have any more advice or suggestions, I would welcome them gratefully. Merry Christmas and thank you.MayYourEditBeAccurate 04:21, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you are referring to with the "clean slate option". If you mean the WP:CLEANSTART policy, you should note that it only applies if the account is in good standing. Since your account is blocked, you should not create a new account. Also, you may not be aware of the WP:SIGLINK policy, but I thought I would bring it to your attention.
- Imposing an indefinite block on someone is certainly going to give that person pause. It is important to note that indefinite is not the same as infinite. ParacusForward (talk) 04:55, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- That is some awesome and long reading WP:SIGLINK I am reading over it more and more.It shall take a moment for me to absorb this Thank
you for the linked reading suggestion! MayYourEditBeAccurate
1zeroate (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
By all means there is what I know is right, what I think is right, and what I need to be shown is right.
Feel free to edit any part of this page to further that end. Yes anyone who is already familiar with myself and this problem of mine that I have contributed to , I'd like it to be clear that I have more to contribute, appropriately, with guidance. Thank you. MayYourEditBeAccurate 02:27, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You still haven't addressed the issues from the last times your request has been declined. I can see no reason (that is, no benefit to the project) in unblocking you now, because you still haven't given us a good reason why we should take the risk and unblocked you, which brings your ability to edit constructively into question. Added to this, you didn't take the advice ParacusForward gave you regarding your signature. I have removed your ability to edit this talk page for 1 month so you have some time away. I suggest you review the Wikipedia:Standard offer and strongly consider asking for one of those in your next unblock request. If you still wish to appeal this block in the following month (and I suggest you wait) you can contact the Ban Appeals Sub-Committee. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:18, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
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've already responded to your unblock request and will let another admin respond to this one, but I will say this: if you don't stop requesting without improvement in your requests, you run the danger of losing talk page access altogether. And please, please learn and use the correct version of their/there/they're - it is painful for an editor to read repeated use of the wrong version. Please also use the default signature; your current sig neither links back to this page nor has your correct uname, and I for one would be extremely surprised if anyone unblocks you before you correct that. KillerChihuahua 01:06, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
1zeroate (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I don't think I should of ever been blocked in the first place. I was not engaged in disruptive editing. I reject the accusation. Asking for Citations is not disruptiveeditor 1:30 pm, Today (UTC+0)
Decline reason:
If you do not wish to address the reasons for your block, that's fine - but you will not be unblocked until you do. With that in mind, I am removing talkpage access for your account; you may appeal the block via WP:UTRS or WP:BASC. Yunshui 雲水 14:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
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.
NPOV
[edit]did you really think that Wikipedia was a repository of knowledge. it has nothing to do with that anyone can edit, but rather Wikipedia is a forum. Also, because anyone can edit Wikipedia, that means no one will edit it. there is a reason why Wikipedia is not allowed in certain countries, and it becomes evident as one grows in age. so very few people edit Wikipedia. what are they doing to you? Dark Liberty (talk) 10:38, 9 February 2014 (UTC)