User talk:2600:387:2:809:0:0:0:7F

Krzyzewski's record

Per your edits regarding Mike Krzyzewski's win–loss record, NCAA guidelines allow schools to make their own determination about who is the coach of record in situations like this; see http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/ForSIDs/Policies.pdf. I traded emails with Cory Walton, sports info director at Duke. He has confirmed that Krzyzewski is the coach of record for all games this season, including the seven in which he was not on sideline. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:43, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Email

Due to privacy reasons, please email me regarding your issue. Thank you. Mkdw ^talk 19:03, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

I had to remove your comments under our policy regarding the disclosure of personal information. When sensitive personal information is being publicly disclosed, especially by someone other than the person with whom the information is about, it is reverted and often suppressed for their protection. Please respect these policies and guidelines. The main issue you are inquiring about is separate and a conversation about the inclusion criteria on the English Wikipedia can be held without disclosing any personal information.

The article Kris Degioia was deleted following a sock puppet investigation in October 2016. It determined that several of single purpose accounts were created to intentionally breach our policies and detection means with the purpose to create dozens upon dozens of promotional articles for financial compensation. This is expressly prohibited by both policies on the English Wikipedia as well as the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use. A subsequent sock puppet investigation determined that the article was again created by accounts violating our policy on the use of multiple accounts.

Lastly, while there are many individuals out there doing good work, life saving work, at an incredible benefit to their community and those they interact with, it does not necessarily mean they should have an encyclopedic article about them on the English Wikipedia. Notability is relative and the English Wikipedia reflects the available coverage about an individual in multiple reliable and independent sources. While Degioia certainly has some coverage in press releases, these are not determined to be independent sources. For further information about our notability standards can be found at WP:GNG, WP:BLP, WP:NPOV, and WP:ANYBIO. Additionally, I strongly recommend you read our policies regarding conflicts of interest as you have indicated you have a close connection to the individual. Mkdw ^talk 22:33, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

I understand why you deleted my comment but instead of giving you all the information you would need to prove all if these people y'all have labeled as sock puppets or this or that, y'all decided to block my username and talk? If I wanted a Wikipedia page I would have given the references that show I more then meet the guidelines for noteworthy (and no they aren't pr releases nor are they blog post) but when my page was taken down over a year ago acussing who,ever the person was that created my article (which to this day I still don't have a clue as to who that was, even if it was a sock puppet that does not mean I had anything to do with it. I tried to defend myself and I was treated like dirt, so that is why I have zero respect for 97% of admins on here. They might has well ran a smear campaign with my name all over Wikipedia. When I received the notification that I was mentioned in a tweet for an article for creation my ver first thought was

oh no here we go again. And looked at the logs and was able to identify who 3-4 of the editors were. I can't speak for all the others but now the software my foundation has created does so much more then identifying exactly who the person behind the computer screen is. The volunteers for csi spent a lot of time trying to create that article, I even saw where they were speaking to people in the chat rooms for help, and one editor was so kind and helped them so much I actually said out loud "wow Wikipedia needs more admins and editors like this guy. What I failed to check before I created my account and my talk page was to,see where they were at the time they where attempting to build it. Which was at my office so of course #bam I get blocked for vandalism? Really? I might not be well versed in Wikipedia language but I'm far from dumb and full of useless internet laws in general. Also of course in return and these two certain admins or editors labeled them as a sock puppet, as I agree with you on the conflict of interest there I do not agree with the other labels they have been given. It's even on my personal website that I DO NOT WANT A Wikipedia page. I was cited in several celebrities Wikipedia pages that if I gave you the names you could all look at the history of their pages and all of the same date my name was removed. Why? Because we respect each other and I asked them to remove me. If I ever decided to have an article on here you will be the first one I let know, with everything that will make y'all take a step back and think "she was telling the truth. I apologize for this long post which feel free to delete after you have read it. But I will fight to prove that the ones I know and have proof are not sock puppets removed and I will not allow these two certain admins who seem to, have it out for me (to be blunt) not slander my name with the quacking ducks, puppets, spamming,'vandelsim and whatever else they have claimed me or any member of my foundation to be. I have sent I'm the right information this morning to,prove all I have stated above. And also noting how I have been treated when I've been more then willing to prove the false claims. I do apologize for the long vent but unlike others I like to tell people the actions I am taking when it comes to my name.

38.88.233.50 (talk) 15:02, 13 June 2017 (UTC) KD

September 2017

Hello, I'm Pkbwcgs. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to That's So Raven have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, 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. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:10, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

May 2018

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at University of Georgia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. <RetroCraft314 talk/> 19:35, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

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).

2600:387:2:809:0:0:0:7F (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Not sure why I was blocked. To my knowledge I have never edited anything that I did not know to be 100% accurate. Please unblock me.

Decline reason:

We have no way of knowing who is sitting at the computer or holding the phone making edits with an IP address at any given time. If you know nothing about any reason for being blocked, then you are likely not the target of the block, and you may request an account at WP:ACC to avoid getting caught up in blocks meant to target others. 331dot (talk) 10:18, 26 November 2020 (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.

---