User talk:Faux Ville

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).

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

Request reason:

I have been accused of sockpuppetry yet the evidence has not been presented to me. I think my account could have been hacked and someone stole my details and implicated me as a sockpuppeter. I am not accusing anyone, but I am truly innocent in this whole matter. I would therefore like to appeal my block. I am looking forward to your reply to my appeal Faux Ville (talk) 07:36, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Per this. Checkuser confirmed sock. Kuru (talk) 11:44, 6 October 2014 (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.

Resoration

@Ponyo: The Khuli Chana page was deleted about two weeks ago due to my ban, but I think the article is very notable enough and it is not fair to delete it because of my ban. So if you can restore it, I'd be very grateful. Faux Ville (talk) 04:41, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help

@Versace1608: I'm having a problem with Ponyo. He reverted Jovondee's edits on Cassper Nyovest's page. Jovondee is my friend who's helping me build the Cassper Nyovest page since I'm banned. And he also been banned too because they think he's me. Ponyo reverted edits that are correct and cited. Please talk to him. He has outdated the article again. Or maybe if you contribute to the article, he won't have a problem. Thanking you in advance. Faux Ville (talk) 06:43, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

the years_active parameter

Stop being hard headed. How many times am I going to tell you that the years _active parameter can either be YYYY–YYYY (or –present)? Nothing is wrong with the latter. Just because you like the former doesn't mean that you need to modify the years_active parameter to suit your preference. This is the last time I am going to tell you. If you change it again, I will report you for edit warring. Versace1608 (Talk) 17:08, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Versace1608: You are really hurting me. Calling me hard headed? That's a violation of the WP:Personal. Most pages have that parameter without brackets and I feel its more presentable. Not to offend you but I think you have Superiority complex. Faux Ville (talk) 17:16, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Call me whatever you want. I already told you that if the latter wasn't right, it wouldn't have been included in the Template:Infobox musical artist article. The latter is not wrong just because the former is used mostly. Versace1608 (Talk) 17:21, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Versace1608: I don't care about a stupid barnstar. It means nothing to me. I don't live for Wikipedia. Faux Ville (talk) 18:31, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:X deluxe edition cover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:X deluxe edition cover.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:57, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:X deluxe edition cover.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:X deluxe edition cover.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:20, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Guest appearances

You cannot include singles under the guest appearances section. Go and check discography articles on Wikipedia if you're confused about the meaning of "guest appearances". I am not going to tell you this again. If you add the "Rands and Nairas" single under that particular section, I will revert your edit. FYI, you should create a featured singles section if you're going to add "Rands and Nairas". Versace1608 (Talk) 17:07, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Versace1608: Thanks for that. Please remove every song on that list as they are all singles. I can't do it because my account is blocked from editing. Faux Ville (talk) 18:15, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock appeal

@Versace1608: You know I remember thinking back in 2011 when I wanted to create a page for myself on Wikipedia. But I didn't know how to create an account then. Everytime I googled "Wikipedia sign up" or "Wikipedia log in", it would only show me results of an article on Wikipedia and it was only until this year I learnt how to create one. Unfortunately because I'm not notable enough, I couldn't do it for myself. But nonetheless the joy I received from creating my first page (Cassper Nyovest) was unexplainable (Even though I was warned for copyright violation because I copied five full paragraphs without changing anything - I was a newbie). I have over 10 articles on Wikipedia that I worked so hard on and what sucks is that I'll never be able to edit them from this account. This is not what I want at all. When I created those 3 sock accounts, I didn't know what I was doing and I admit it was wrong. But when you guys blocked me from editing, I felt like I was going crazy because I live for editing. I might pretend like I don't care about Wikipedia, but I do. Why would I go through all this? (Creating over 10 sock accounts in a week) I'm just hoping you guys unblock me from editing. I swear, I'll use this account only from now on. I've learnt my lesson. I'm so sad I had to create the Khuli Chana page using a fake account because I was blocked. But I'm done doing that. I swear I won't open another sock account. You can keep me on probation for a month or 2 months if you don't trust me. If by the end of this year I create another sock, don't even consider unblocking me for another 10 years. But if I'm good and I behave for those 2 months please consider my plea. I just want to contribute to Wikipedia and create more articles for very notable South African artists without them as part of WikiProject SA, an initiative I hold close to my heart. Faux Ville (talk) 20:09, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

K.O — Skhanda Republic

Hey there guys @Versace1608:, @Darreg:, @Jamie Tubers:. Since I'm blocked from editing, can one of you please update the Skhanda Republic page's release date. The exact date is October 20, 2014. I don't know why @Ponyo:removed that date. It was announced in early October. Here are 2 RELIABLE sources to prove this:

Source 1

Source 2

Thanks in advance. Faux Ville (talk) 15:05, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Skhanda Republic.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Skhanda Republic.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 12:22, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Gusheshe.jpeg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Gusheshe.jpeg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:28, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:X files mixtape cover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:X files mixtape cover.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:45, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]