User talk:FreshCorp619

Archives

FreshCorp619 is taking a long wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia after the sockpuppet/copyright issue is resolved (six months). Due to other projects aside from WMF and Wikia, I will do other things constructively for now.

Unblock

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).

FreshCorp619 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I regret I didn't copy but I was never a "evasive" sockpuppet which is a extremely harsh word to say. I would requet a fast track, early unblock for both accounts since I've smarten enough to rewrite User:Moonriddengirl and User:Justlettersandnumbers. How am I going to edit the articles for six months if I have no wikipedia account to edit? I can accept the appeal to the Abritration Committee. I regularly read and edit the articles on a massive regular basis. We can work together to clean up and rewrite copyright infringed material throughout this Wiki. Just to let everybody know, my true identity is Jelo Gutierrez Cantos and I have vast knowledge of information from my ADHD Disability. Since I started editing in 2008, I've also read and checked copyrighted materials as well in this Wikipedia that other users copy and pasted. I apologize for my ruly and crazed behavior and I promise that I will be a smarter and proper innovative Wikipedian in years to come. If this request was denied, I will be officially retired from the community after five years of service. Thank you for your submission to the Wikipedia. FreshCorp619 (talk) 01:26, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

{{subst:Per below}} John Reaves 01:44, 10 November 2013 (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.

Copyright block

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without verifying permission. You have been previously warned that this is against policy, but have persisted.

Please take this opportunity to be sure you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content. If you wish to resume editing, it may be necessary for you to demonstrate your understanding of these policies and reassure the community of your willingness to comply. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:53, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While I would prefer that it had not come to a block, you seem completely unwilling to work within processes and are continuing to restore copyrighted materials to publication. For one example, text you restored to Monsignor Fraser College included the following:

The Alternative Education Program is a program designed to meet the needs of students who are experiencing difficulty achieving success at their present high school. It offers students a small, personalized environment which recognizes student's unique learning styles. Students also have the opportunity to earn two (2) full credits every nine weeks. Potential students must be referred by their secondary school and may complete and academic assessment to determine appropriate programming.

This is what the source says about that:

This program is designed to meet the needs of students who are experiencing difficulty achieving success at their present high school. It offers students a small, personalized environment which recognizes student's unique learning styles. Students also have the opportunity to earn two (2) full credits every nine weeks. Potential students must be referred by their secondary school and may complete and academic assessment to determine appropriate programming.

This is just a small passage of a much larger problem.

I do not believe you should be unblocked until you are able to make absolutely clear that you understand the policies and are willing and able to comply. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:53, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request

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).

FreshCorp619 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I apologize for the error I caused when copyright. So please unblock me and I have one more reprieve (chance). So give me like one hour. User:Moonriddengirl Thank you. FreshCorp619 (talk) 00:56, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

{{subst:Requester withdrew own request, removing this and labeling his page retired - and immediatley [https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:Log/SPVII_DrFresh26 created a block evading sockpuppet}} Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:40, 10 November 2013 (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.

I'm sorry, but this doesn't explain why you kept restoring the content or give any reason to believe that you're done with violating our copyright policy. In the one comment you removed from me today, I told you very plainly here that you could not put back copy-pasted content. Your removal of it verifies that you saw it. And yet, after that notice, you did it multiple times: [1] (whereupon I gave you a a second warning and explanation), [2] and [3]. The initial copyright problem is one thing - even after you were pointed to policy and warned you would be blocked if you continued. But restoring the content repeatedly after being told not to? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:16, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did these by accident but I didn't break the rules. However, I've wrote most articles using my own words like from the World Championship Wrestling article to prove you right: "The company is still listed under Georgia Corporations as of July 2013 under Time Warner as an active corporation. [4]". Since i've wrote many articles since I joined so I can give the people what they want, I misunderstood the copyright rules and will not break the rules of copyright on the articles again in the foreseeable future. How am I going to upload and contribute the photos I have on my computer? FreshCorp619 (talk) 01:23, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Second Request

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).

FreshCorp619 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I've been blocked for almost thirty days and the "sockpuppet account" was my temporary account. I just wanted my old original account unblocked User:Moonriddengirl in order to look for possible copyrighted material that users wrote. An example from the Senator O'Connor College School article was copied from this one. I would like to request an unblock so we can work together on cleaning up several copyvios. Failing that User:Moonriddengirl, I'm retired after 5 years. Thank you.

UPDATE: Hey User:Moonriddengirl, I found out who copied that here was Special:Contributions/69.199.109.29 from October 28, 2006. Another one: Cardinal Carter Academy for the Arts from here created on March 28, 2005 by User:Dalhousie that copied from this one. If you unblock me, I'll leave you a message on your talk page on potential copyright violations. FreshCorp619 (talk) 02:00, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

while Moonriddengirl and others have worked very hard to remove copyright violations from Wikipedia, you busied yourself putting them back in, even after being blocked for it previously. Add block evasion on top of that and I'm afraid I agree with her assessment of the situation and you should consider the standard offer your best path to being unblocked. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:01, 10 November 2013 (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.

I made every effort to take you on good faith before you were blocked, but you repeatedly restored copyright violations after multiple notices that you should not. You abandoned an unblock request on this page to create a block-evading sockpuppet hours into your block. Your so-called temporary account was self-labeled a "cleanstart." There is nothing to suggest that you intended it to be temporary or wanted to use it to clean your copy-pastes. You told the editor who discovered your block evasion that you were changing your focus . (In fact, though, you had not changed your focus. We can easily see your contribution list returned you immediately to the same area where you had focused before...including several articles which I have today discovered included copyvios. Why did you not clean those, if working on cleaning up your copyvios was your goal?) It is really difficult to take you on good faith after your behavior. :/ --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:18, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I forgot to tell you User:Moonriddengirl about the Cardinal Carter Academy for the Arts article which was copied and made by User:Dalhousie in 2005 which I didn't join Wikipedia at the time. I will be honored to clean up and re-write the article although my mind seems to be messed up. Please accept my unblock request to clean up the Cardinal Carter article. The Monsignor Percy Johnson Catholic Secondary School article, which was deleted, i've decided to clean it to avoid potential copyvios.

I'll prove you and everybody right by cleaning up that article! Together we can make a difference. I will not restore copyright violations ever again and be a nice editor. I'm from Toronto you know that which I edit articles for public transit, entertainment companies, pro wrestling industry and more. FreshCorp619 (talk) 02:26, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I regret that if I followed the rules, I would've joined the Wikiproject cleanup in the first place by adding this tag

This user is a member of
WikiProject Cleanup.

It's all my fault that I should've followed the rules. User:Moonriddengirl, my block should be reduced since my past edits before the block were "good faith". I am joining the WikiProject Cleanup FreshCorp619 (talk) 02:39, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

With regards to the first article you identified, the IP didn't copy that history from the website. I've explained why at the talk page. But I did find copying in that article from you. :/

I don't see any copying from User:Dalhousie in this version of the article from [5], although it's possible that I'm overlooking something. Our duplication detector doesn't find it, either.

With respect to the deleted article - you edited it five times with your sockpuppet account without cleaning up the copying.

You were blocked because you restored copyrighted content to articles multiple times after it was already removed and you were told not to. That doesn't feel like "good faith". --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:44, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't felt special User:Moonriddengirl when I felt so which I accidentally restored content to the Madonna Catholic Secondary School article by mistake. So how am i gonna clean up that Cardinal Carter article that User:Dalhousie started with. I cannot stay blocked for more than 3 years because there's no way i'm going to start cleaning that up along with the rest of the articles i'm fixing. My friend there's a saying from Anne Lamott that "the reason I never give up hope is because everything is so basically hopeless." I should never give up on editing.

According to this: "Throughout the 1980s the Metropolitan Separate School Board (now the Toronto Catholic District School Board) considered establishing a school for the Performing Arts. It was felt that all students with clearly identified talents in the arts regardless of their socio-economic status, race or cultural background, should have the opportunity to develop those talents within the TCDSB system. Therefore with the commitment and interest of parents and students, the first set of auditions were held in January 1990. Five hundred applications were processed for 250 positions and Cardinal Carter Academy for the Arts opened its doors to grade 7,8 and 9 students in September 1990. The school was named after Gerald Emmet Cardinal Carter, Ordinary of the Archdiocese of Toronto since 1979, a strong supporter of education and a distinguished patron of the arts. CCAA is a Catholic school community built upon Gospel values and the love of learning. Students, with the help of staff and parents, receive a balanced and thorough education in the arts, and through the arts. Cardinal Carter is a unique school with unique needs and concerns, not a typical elementary or secondary school but a hybrid of both, serving students from grade 7 to 12." which is "Throughout the 1980s the Metropolitan Separate School Board (now the Toronto Catholic District School Board) considered establishing a school for the Performing Arts. It was felt that all students with clearly identified talents in the Arts regardless of their socio-economic status, race or cultural background, should have the opportunity to develop those talents within the TCDSB system. Therefore with the commitment and interest of parents and students, the first set of auditions were held in January 1990. Five hundred applications were processed for 250 positions and Cardinal Carter Academy for the Arts opened its doors to grade 7, 8 and 9 students in September 1990. The school was named after Gerald Emmett Cardinal Carter, Ordinary of the Archdiocese of Toronto from 1978 to 1990, a strong supporter of education and a distinguished patron of the arts. CCAA is a Catholic school community built upon Gospel values and the love of learning. Students, with the help of staff and parents, receive a balanced and thorough education in the Arts, and through the Arts. We are a unique school with unique needs and concerns, not a typical elementary or secondary school but a hybrid of both, serving students from grade 7 to 12." That is likely copied User:Moonriddengirl but modified by Dalhousie.FreshCorp619 (talk) 02:53, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Special note to User:Moonriddengirl

Hi again, if I set things right as you read this message above, I could've followed WP:MOS and WP:EQ since I joined. I can't even regret it that the Copyright Violations didn't add WP:PLAG at all. The articles i've perfectly made you deleted or modified back didn't follow "INCITE, INTEXT, INTEGRITY." These deleted articles should have been restored in order to follow certain fair use guidelines (WP:F). Out in respect, I just wanted my editing privileges restored to fix the damages or I will be removed from Wikipedia permanently as per WP:BAN. FreshCorp619 (talk) 06:43, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your statements don't make sense to me - you say, "I can't even regret it that the Copyright Violations didn't add WP:PLAG at all."

Let's look at a few paragraphs you've added to Wikipedia at various articles for comparison.

Article	source text	What you put in the article
History of Toronto Catholic District School Board	Survival, let alone expansion, of the Board was a difficult challenge. The separate school trustees and their supporters faced a number of obstacles. Although the Board received the common school fund (i.e. provincial grants) in the same amount on a per-pupil basis as the Toronto Common (i.e. Public) School Board, the Catholic school supporters still had to pay common school taxes along with paying tuition for their children to attend St. Paul’s. If the common school located in the same school district of Toronto as St. Paul’s, hired a Catholic in any year, St. Paul’s would have been declared non-existent. If the Toronto Separate School Board wished a second school, it had to request it from the city’s municipal council. Monies for teacher salaries and school buildings even approximating those of the Toronto public schools was unavailable.[6]	Survival, let alone expansion, of the Board was a difficult challenge. The separate school trustees and their supporters faced a number of obstacles. Although the Board received the common school fund (i.e. provincial grants) in the same amount on a per-pupil basis as the Toronto Common (i.e. Public) School Board, the Catholic school supporters still had to pay common school taxes along with paying tuition for their children to attend St. Paul’s. If the common school located in the same school district of Toronto as St. Paul’s, hired a Catholic in any year, St. Paul’s would have been declared non-existent. If the Toronto Separate School Board wished a second school, it had to request it from the city’s municipal council. Monies for teacher salaries and school buildings even approximating those of the Toronto public schools was unavailable.
Monsignor Fraser College	Born in Toronto, Fraser studied with the Vincentian order in Italy, where he became interested in the missions. After ordination he volunteered for becoming the first English-speaking Canadian Catholic missionary in that country. From 1902 to 1918 he served in Ninghsien (Ningpo) and other cities in the province of Chekiang (Zhejiang). In 1918 he succeeded in opening a seminary to train missionary priests in Almonte, Ontario. One year later he founded a missionary journal, China (later Scarboro Missions).[7]	John Andrew Mary Fraser was born in Toronto in 1887. He studied with the Vincentian order in Italy, where he became interested in the missions. After ordination he volunteered for becoming the first English-speaking Canadian Catholic missionary in that country. From 1902 to 1918 he served in Ninghsien (Ningpo) and other cities in the province of Chekiang (Zhejiang). In 1918 he succeeded in opening a seminary to train missionary priests in Almonte, Ontario. One year later he founded a missionary journal, China (later Scarborough Missions)
Total Nonstop Action Wrestling	TNA filed a lawsuit yesterday in court in Nashville against WWE and former TNA and WWE office worker Brian Wittenstein for interference with existing contracts, conversion, breach of contract, civil conspiracy, unfair competition, and violation of the Tennessee Uniform Trade Secrets Act. They are also suing Wittenstein for breach of duty of loyalty.[8]	On May 24, 2012, TNA filed a lawsuit in court in Nashville against WWE, Inc. and former office worker Brian Wittenstein for interference with existing contracts, conversion, breach of contract, civil conspiracy, unfair competition, and violation of the Tennessee Uniform Trade Secrets Act. They are also suing Wittenstein for breach of duty of loyalty.
Nova Bus LFS (Toronto Transit Commission bus)	The TTC’s first Nova LFS arrived on commission property in May 1998. NovaBus #1001 was a demonstration vehicle purchased by the TTC to test Nova’s new low floor design. The bus operated out of Eglinton garage, in service as an extra on that garage’s routes. The test was successful enough that the TTC decided to make low-floor buses the mainstay of the fleet.[9]	The TTC’s first Nova LFS arrived on commission property in May 1998. NovaBus 1001 was a demonstration vehicle purchased by the TTC to test Nova’s new low floor design.... The bus operated out of Eglinton garage, in service as an extra on that garage’s routes. The test was successful enough that the TTC decided to make low-floor buses the mainstay of the fleet.

These are just a few of the many issues with copyright and plagiarism that were discovered in your work involving many articles and many sources. This is not remotely acceptable under WP:NFC and it is both a violation of our copyright policy and Wikipedia:Plagiarism. It is also a violation of our Terms of Use.

Immediately upon being blocked, you created a brand new account to continue working without interruption. This is a violation of WP:Block.

At this point, I do not think we can trust you to contribute, although I will leave your unblock request for another administrator to evaluate. Personally, I would seriously suggest you consider Wikipedia:Standard offer if you want to return to editing. So far, nothing you've done has led me to believe that you have any interest in working with policy, and that would go a long way to help. Also helpful if you focus on the following sentence: "Banned users seeking a return are well-advised to make significant and useful contributions to other WMF-projects prior to requesting an en:return per this 'offer' as many unban-requests have been declined due to the banned user simply 'waiting' the six months out." If you can demonstrate that you've made useful contributions to another project that do not include copy-pasted or closely paraphrased material, it will go a long way to demonstrating that you are not going to be a liability for Wikipedia. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:25, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're a smart and nice admin with a good sense of humor and I'm a nice guy. I just wanted a "fast-track" immediate return to editing before this weekend ends rather than waiting six to eight months as per WP:SO. The majority of my edits were subsequently written in my own words such as the articles City (TV Network), CHCHDT, CJNT-DT, E! (Canadian TV System), just to name a few. Most of those edits came from 2009 to 2012. The block (even indef) which we know is temporary, could last weeks, months or even YEARS although I'm a member of the Wikipedia team. Otherwise User:Moonriddengirl, I could face a possible ban and I'm gone from wikipedia permanently (WP:BAN). So we know blocks are temporary (shorter or longer) and bans are permanent. Over 80% of the articles I contributed from 2009 to 2012 are slightly edited. Check my contribution pages and tell me why you think. There's no way that I'm editing several articles on professional wrestling and music artists with me temporarily in my short-term indefinte block. In short, ill just stop being silly as a abusive sockpuppet and ill get back to basics just like I did in 2012. FreshCorp619 (talk) 15:18, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Third Request

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).

FreshCorp619 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello there User:Moonriddengirl and User:Beeblebrox, you tried to get me unblocked earlier in this attempt but you guys rejected it. I can admit that I accidently put those things back in you removed because I wanted a fast track return to editing before tomorrow since you're cleaning up the damages I caused. Failing that, is it okay to do the WP:SO challenge? I'll take a six month break from editing without being a sock puppet. Can you explain to me how the Standard offer works? Thank you. FreshCorp619 (talk) 20:23, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As below; please do not use this template to ask questions. Kuru (talk) 23:33, 10 November 2013 (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.

The "standard offer" is that you stop asking for unblocking and leave the English Wikipedia for six months, without creating new accounts to edit further. Ideally, during those six months you will contribute constructively to another MediaWiki site, like another language Wikipedia or simple Wikipedia or Wikibooks or Wikiversity or Wiktionary. When you return, you explain why you think we can rely on you from then on to follow the site's policies, perhaps pointing to your contributions on those other sites. Being able to point to substantial text additions on those other sites that are fully copyright compliant would be a really good start. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:49, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, there;s always the simple English Wikipedia, or citizendium - I bet what they want - what they really really want - is lots of articles on Canadian Catholic primary schools. Don't forget to list all the important things - especially who the caretakers and dinner ladies are. Barney the barney barney (talk) 12:50, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning

Hi there User:Moonriddengirl, despite not being a "sock puppet" (which am innocent), I have questions regarding sockpuppet accounts (although am I allowed to continue doing projects in other Wikimedias)? Six months in this account is about to expire. How am I gonna contribute to cleanup the damage I've done since November?

I'm sorry to say this, but those accounts are separate entitles (my dormant account User:SilverPlaqueVII is not used at the moment). FreshCorp619 (talk) 11:35, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock: Overdue

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).

FreshCorp619 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm so sorry to say this but without my resources, I may or may not continue in English Wikipedia in over a year. Six months is long enough. FreshCorp619 (talk) 11:40, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Given that you seem to have no interest no avoiding copyright violations, I see no reason to unblock. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:12, 27 March 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.

Recreate from scratch

In the meantime, would User:Eastmain, recreate the stubs of the now deleted Madonna Catholic Secondary School, Blessed Cardinal Newman Catholic High School and others? FreshCorp619 (talk) 11:46, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No. I don't think it's fair for you to expect other people to fix the problems that you created. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 20:03, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bullying

Asserting towards WP:WikiBullying, you always have my back User:Moonriddengirl, but the other users who reverted my edits are risking me a full ban for being a sockpuppet without my privacy?

Failing that, You my friend that I may request the potential ban from the English Wikipedia in the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard and WP:List of banned users, otherwise, I should be banned from editing school articles. Thank you FreshCorp619 (talk) 11:59, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have just blocked a new sock puppet account of yours, User:NovaFlyer7000, and the first thing I find is a copyright violation - "Blessed Cardinal Newman is located on a magnificent 45 acre campus overlooking the Scarborough Bluffs and Lake Ontario, a site shared with St. Augustine's Seminary."? You didn't write that. You copied it. :( You said you would stop doing that and have no, so never mind the sock puppetry - you are still violating copyright policy. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:28, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing

FreshCorp619, is it your goal to be banned altogether? If you keep creating sock puppets, that's a very real possibility. Please note that anything you do while blocked can be deleted or removed at any time. If you want to come back and know that your work will be allowed to stay, then you must do it through proper channels. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:18, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you guide me through "proper channels" please Maggie (User:Moonriddengirl)? You've ignored the considerate fact that my other account (User:SilverPlaqueVII) is NOT and never will be a sock puppet as per WP:SP guidelines but a separate, legitimate, inactive and unused account. I'm proven innocent and not guility. Unblocking me immediately and teaming up will be the easy option/solution. Other option will be this case. You prove me wrong Maggie but I have been involved in other articles in the English Wikipedia. However, would yould you reduce a block a little? You've proven my point. Have a good day Maggie. FreshCorp619 (talk) 11:40, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note to that, it would appear Users User:Justlettersandnumbers and User:Secondarywaltz tried to nearly harass and bully as per WP:BULLY I also fell victim to it.

Am I also allowed on the Wikimedia Commons as well? I'm sorry I messed up on the Monsignor Fraser College article back in October. I forgot to paraphrase it to avoid copyrights. Could also ban the socks too?

All these new accounts you've created are sock puppets, FreschCorp619. You're not going to be unblocked immediately. You've violated copyright policies multiple times and have now started sock puppeting to keep contributing even though you know you shouldn't. I've found copy-pasting in one of your sock accounts' work, too. :/ You've been told to consider the Wikipedia:Standard offer, and I would think about that if I were you. If you can show that you can contribute constructively somewhere else, the odds are much higher that your block will be lifted here. But you have to stop sock puppeting and block evading. Even edits like this are a violation of policy. You're not allowed to edit Wikipedia right now at all.

You shouldn't make accusations about other editors bullying you without evidence. Never mind that this is itself against policy (see WP:NPA), without evidence it looks like you still just aren't accepting that you've done or are doing anything wrong. So far as I can see, all User:Justlettersandnumbers ever did to you was flag problems with your text (including copyright violations), while User:Secondarywaltz doesn't seem to have edited your talk page at all. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:06, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Felt too silly obviously Maggie (User:Moonriddengirl). Since they are nice professionals, I misunderstood in an error, but however. What are the long term preventions to this? I am more than welcome to do WP:SO but I began uploading the content on the Commons. So is this block only apply to this English Wikipedia only? Some of the accounts i've created are nearly NOT socks (User:NovaFlyer7000) but i've done nothing wrong here.

Two options Maggie: I'll proceed with the Wikipedia:Standard offer and i'm off to stay at Wikimedia Commons or you my friend, may proceed with the ban from the English Wikipedia as per WP:BAN and my name may end up in the long-term abuse list. I give up :/ After this, i'll promise to return under my user name Midland in the future. In the meantime Maggie, see you in the Commons or any other Wikimedia project. :) FreshCorp619 (talk) 14:03, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS and GFDL

Hi Maggie (User:Moonriddengirl, while i'm stuck in the waiting list, some of the articles i've almost copied since you blocked me (not an edit war - WP:WAR). Seems you done a good job placing the OTRS on the PNTC Colleges. Why didn't you and anyone use my edited articles licensed under CC-By-SA and GFDL like Monsignor Fraser College, Madonna Catholic Secondary School (deleted), Dante Alighieri Academy, St. Rose of Lima Catholic School (Toronto) and 21st Century Learning (deleted). You didn't get the Creative Commons thing do you Maggie. I admit that I did not copied into some articles, but I had to rewrite it to avoid copyright violations and it's unfair to have articles deleted that would've been into fair use. My two cents. FreshCorp619 (talk) 18:26, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FreshCorp619, I think you really don't understand our licenses and our approach to non-free content. :/

The OTRS tag was placed on PNTC Colleges because the college wrote to us and gave us permission. None of the schools you wrote about did that. It has nothing to do with fair use. You don't have the right to release content that somebody else wrote under CC-By-SA and GFDL even if you change it some. They have to do that.

So, when you copy content from [10] the content is not licensed under CC-By-SA and GFDL. Because you don't have the legal right to license it.

Taking just one paragraph from 21st Century Learning, for example, you put this in the article:

The desk serves as an alternative model to the common school desk which has been at the centre of the traditional classroom since its invention during the Industrial Revolution. While serving as an appropriate symbol for education characterized by the delivery of information, it falls short of representing the 21st Century learner in our current digital age. The NeXt Desk attempts to capture the spirit of a new era of learning. Rising from the classroom floor, the 13 foot tall wheel is composed of twenty typical 20th century desks. It stands and rolls as a new symbol for interconnected, collaborative and experiential learning.

We look in that source. It says:

John describes The NeXt Desk, as an alternative model to the common school desk which has been at the centre of the traditional classroom since its invention during the Industrial Revolution. While serving as an appropriate symbol for education characterized by the delivery of information, it falls short of representing the 21st Century learner in our current digital age. The NeXt Desk attempts to capture the spirit of a new era of learning. Rising from the classroom floor, the 13 foot tall wheel is composed of twenty typical 20th century desks. It stands and rolls as a new symbol for interconnected, collaborative and experiential learning.

We can't keep that stuff. It's against our policies, and it is against our Terms of Use.

Content you place now from your sock puppet accounts may be deleted regardless of what it is. When you are blocked, you are not supposed to edit. I have seen blocked editors create sock puppets that have escaped detection for months only to have hundreds of edits and dozens of articles deleted once they are found out. This wastes time for everybody. Much better to do things the right way.

In response to your question above, which I'm only just now noticing, you are free to contribute to Commons. Make sure you follow their copyright policies and only upload content that is properly licensed. There are also other projects you might contribute to, like Simple English Wikipedia or Wikiversity or Wikibooks. But you need to make sure you obey the Terms of Use. They apply to every project the Wikimedia Foundation hosts.

You cannot copy or too closely paraphrase copyrighted content unless it is compatibly licensed. It comes down to that. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 10:43, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here's what I do to avoid copyvios:

Use your own wording. Write it in your own words
Don't always present the information in the same order the original source does. Present the information in a new order that makes sense for the article.
Don't take every scrap of information from a source, just take what is good for an encyclopedia article.
One trick I do is "chop up" the information. So if I have three sources, the information from those sources is scattered together. Think about making a stir fry: You cut up the beef and vegetables into pieces. You mix the information (already in your own words) and scramble it so it's all tangled. So it's impossible for the article to closely paraphrase any source

WhisperToMe (talk) 10:03, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Saved it! FreshCorp619 (talk) 02:18, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another sock is blocked

I've just blocked User:Edutainment. You know how I found it? I spotted another copyvio. It seems that you are completely unwilling to abide by our copyright policies. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:19, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not my socks None of those accounts made ARE my socks Mags nor my SilverPlaqueVII (sleeper). These belong to my SPVII_DrFresh26 account. Not this one, but though, you can't just call a ban anyway. That is NOW a wrestling themed and general interest account moving forward. (NOT A THREAT BUT A IMPROBABLE QUESTION WHY DID YOU NOT REWRITE THOSE PROPERLY, I NEVER DONE ANYTHING WRONG. - Sorry Caps Lock on.)FreshCorp619 (talk) 01:02, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FreshCorp619, accounts don't "belong to" your SPVII_DrFresh26 account - they belong to you, and you are blocked for copyright violations, something you have continued in every sock that has been disclosed. There is no such thing as a "separate professionalism test-bed accounts" - you are not allowed to edit the English Wikipedia under any account whatsoever, period, until you can negotiate an unblock. This requires demonstrating that you will stop copy-pasting content, and you seem completely unwilling to stop doing that. As I indicated above, I discovered your latest account because you used it to violate our copyright policies again. Even if you ever were given the "standard offer", the six months starts from the end of your sockpuppeting. That clock resets every time you use a sock. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:08, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This won't be my last - Not a threat but more professionalism

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).

FreshCorp619 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Six months are overdue, those accounts that Moonriddengirl blocked since November 2013 are not sockpuppets, but separate professionalism test-bed accounts for other things moving forward. This account was locked out since October 2013 on the English Wikipedia but I retained the unused User:SilverPlaqueVII that was never touched.
I would also to request a "one-week temporary unblock" to undo the damage i've done . It's my decision not Maggie, User:Secondarywaltz or User:Justlettersandnumbers without me eating the Skittles pieces.

Decline reason:

As stated below, your six-month period is reset as from yesterday. And please note that all of your accounts are sockpuppets; we do not recognize the concept of separate professionalism test-bed accounts. It is you, personally, who is blocked, not just one or more of your named accounts.--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 10:57, 17 May 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.

The six months gets reset every time you are caught socking and breaking our copyright rules. Seeing as you were just caught again only yesterday, that means the six month period starts again and won't expire until November 2014. Although, looking at the history of this talk page, I don't think the chances of an unblock even then are very good - and because I find it hard to believe that one person can actually be so stupid, the probability that this is just trolling seems very high. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:44, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For more reference

Please examine the articles of Eric Bischoff, WWE, Monday Night Wars and World Championship Wrestling Maggie for reference. I made every step forward to add and correct accurate information to WCW.

Oh and BTW, I just cited it and added from this link on the R. H. King Academy article here ([11]. Once copied, it must be cited. These infoboxes Maggie you did should be reverted back at my request to reflect the current status ONLY. FreshCorp619 (talk) 02:09, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that you may not have copied content into some articles does not change the fact that you did add it into others. For instance, John Polanyi Collegiate Institute included content copied from [12] and Burnhamthorpe Collegiate Institute included content copied from [13]? I have no idea what you're trying to say by "once copied, it must be cited" to explain why you added copied content today in this edit. It wasn't in the article to require citation before you copied it. You should be aware by this point that citing your source does not make it okay to copy non-free content to Wikipedia. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 02:20, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect

Hi Maggie,

Other than delete copyrighted articles, you may want to give an idea to redirect the deleted or the copyrighted articles to certain neighbourhood or board pages instead using #REDIRECT because I do not want red links:

Sounds good. Let me, User:Eastmain, or anyone know. Please see Wikipedia:Contributor_copyright_investigations/FreshCorp619 for reference.

On the personal note, Happy Victoria Day to you from the North Maggie! FreshCorp619 (talk) 17:40, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please just stop the copyvios and sock puppets. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 20:06, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikibreak

Hi User:Eastmain and Maggie, from what this message says above, I will take a WP:WIKIBREAK from the English Wikipedia for a while as what Moonriddengirl said, "other language Wikipedia or simple Wikipedia or Wikibooks or Wikiversity or Wiktionary" as per WP:SO. I did use Wikiquote a few times. Bear with me, Eastmain, your words are true man. From that point on, I'm also gonna be away to do other project commitments and a few family matters to settle. #GoGetEmBoys FreshCorp619 (talk) 17:19, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing block evasion

I have just blocked another IP for editing in spite of your block.

I have verified further violations of our copyright policy:

Article	Source
Throughout the 1970s and the early 1980s, the school remained "above projections". With its Gifted Program drawing students from all across Scarborough, its adult classes, its popularity because of its academic and sports record, its ESL program and its general image as a successful and congenial place to be, it draws many students from outside its boundary, Woburn has remained above enrollment projections. In 1987-88, with enrollment hovering near 2,000 mark, saw the return of 3 portables, something almost unheard of for an established school.	Throughout the 70s and the early 80s, the school remained "above projections". With its Gifted Program drawing students from all across Scarborough, its adult classes, its popularity because of its academic and sports record, its ESL program and its general image as a successful and congenial place to be, it draws many students from outside its boundary, Woburn has remained above enrollment projections. In 1987-8, with enrollment hovering near 2,000 mark, saw the return of 3 portables, something almost unheard of for an established school.

I will be reverting the work of that IP. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:53, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This IP doesn't belong to my account. You misunderstood it. I was in the Wikimedia Commons for a while and got used to it. Maggie, forgive me but ever since I joined this Wikipedia in 2008, I was really passionate of the internet. Doesn't take rocket science to do so. FreshCorp619 (talk) 00:04, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:David and Mary Thomson CI Logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:David and Mary Thomson CI Logo.svg. 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) 21:21, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:David and Mary Thomson CI Logo.svg

Thanks for uploading File:David and Mary Thomson CI Logo.svg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:21, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Tabor Park VS Logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Tabor Park VS Logo.svg. 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) 21:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not my IP

THis ACCOUNT is not affiliated with my IP. However, if it is not resolved anytime soon, [[WP:ANI}} would be an option.

FreshCorp619 (talk) 23:36, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: User:Moonriddengirl, I wasn't able to copy some, but re-wrote it. Can you unblock this account since this is NOT linked to the last incidents? I was inactive.

Unblock (#NotMyIp)

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).

FreshCorp619 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The IP address that Moonriddengirl blocked is Not linked to my account, which is unusable in the English Wikipedia. While I was gone from here, I used Wikimedia, Wikimapia, vice versa. She falsely blocked my IP address because this IP is not part of my account. I am appealing this immediately. As part of my appeal, please delete my sockpuppet accounts. She's no use to my help, but how would I edit the English Wikipedia if I am banned from here? I did not abuse Wikimedia Commons, and the others. FreshCorp619 (talk) 23:45, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The behavioral evidence of sockpuppetry given by Moonriddengirl is more than adequate. Huon (talk) 02:30, 19 December 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.

User, FreshCorp619, that is obviously untrue. This IP that you claim was not your account has been actively adding images you uploaded to Commons, such as in this edit, minutes after you uploaded them on Commons. (Literally - File:Winston Churchill Collegiate Datestone.jpg, 3:44 13 December upload added at 3:51 13 December. You uploaded File:TSN Hockey.svg at 3:34 11 December and added it to Wikipedia, with the IP you deny is yours, 3 minutes later.) It has been editing your favorite articles and in some cases restoring content that was removed that you had added before. The only real advantage here is that in following up this IP, I did find and remove some older copyright problems that have not yet been identified in the CCI. You are not allowed to edit English Wikipedia, but you continue to do so, and I demonstrated above, you are still making new copyright problems. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:56, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The main account I created is from a different IP years ago. How would I edit other than here. I did use the commons and occasionally, Wikimapia. You forgot to mention that those articles you hidden and restored, would you able to stub and rewrite them please. :) FreshCorp619 (talk) 01:03, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In some cases, I wanted my editing privileges back without being rude. I should've told you last year about the copyright. My fault :/. FreshCorp619 (talk) 01:11, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Restoration

Hey User:Moonriddengirl, can you stub and restore the Tabor Park Vocational School and its infobox please. There's some info written by User:WhisperToMe as well as my photos I uploaded from the Wikimedia Commons (portions need to be re-written and partially undeleted). The article does not have any copyvio.

The Tabor Park article is from my sources though.

Other articles needs to be restored (and stubbed) before you reverted it back (those things are from the Wikimedia Commons) User:Eastmain could stub and fix up the articles:

Albert Campbell Collegiate Institute (and its infobox)
Birchmount Park Collegiate Institute (and its infobox / alumni / IPs)
David and Mary Thomson Collegiate Institute (and galleries, infobox, alumni)
Midland Avenue Collegiate Institute (and galleries / alumni)
Nelson A. Boylen Collegiate Institute (former names and ongoing lease with the TCDSB. Please have User:Eastmain or you to stub and rewrite it.)
R. H. King Academy (and galleries / alumni)
Weston Collegiate Institute (former names)
Winston Churchill Collegiate Institute (and galleries/alumni)
Woburn Collegiate Institute (and infobox)

I apologize for the error, but the IP does not belong to my account.

FreshCorp619 (talk) 00:22, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That is patently untrue. The IP belongs to your account, and you persist in editing against your block and in adding new copyright problems, as I've demonstrated above. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:58, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've been blocked for a year and I did not get unblocked. I already did the standard offer. Can you discuss the issue on the WP:ANI? How would I expand the area if I am blocked since I have lack of evasions. Please fix everything you reverted. FreshCorp619 (talk) 01:05, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, if I take this to ANI, I'll just be asking for an official ban. Another admin will review your block request. I've removed your alteration of my note, as it is not permitted to alter other's notes. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:12, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You might wanna still re-add some content you reverted (Thomson and Tabor Park). However, would I remain in the Wikipedia in other language, Wikimedia Commons, and others? The ban you said is only in this English Wikipedia. (I would hope my name is or is not in the LTA). FreshCorp619 (talk) 01:17, 19 December 2014 (UTC) (#GodHelpUs)[reply]

And at this point in spite of my note above you change my note again. I think User:Boing! said Zebedee figured out your motivation long before I did. From this point, I will merely follow WP:RBI. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:44, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's been November 2014 and I would've asked you since last month. WP:RBI does not work this way. I also want to request my appeal as well.

Oh and User:Moonriddengirl, I also want to say as well Happy New Year and Holidays.FreshCorp619 (talk) 01:51, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Standard offer

The IP address you blocked User:Moonriddengirl is wrong. My WP:SO is seven months past. Can you unblock this account right now because I officially followed the standard offer since June. The IP should be unblocked too because its not connected to my account but separate. FreshCorp619 (talk) 00:57, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hiatus

User:Moonriddengirl, in lieu of a ban and block, the WP:MISSYOU note means I will be exiting the English Wikipedia project in order to fulfill the Wikipedia:Standard offer (will remain with the MediaWiki). Since I am in the Wikia network particularly Dragon Ball Wiki, I have no problems there. If I come back, can you forgive me the way I foolish to you and the Wikipedians. Do the right thing and respond. Please restore some articles you copyvioed while I am on exodus. FreshCorp619 (talk) 02:04, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Francis Libermann Catholic High School logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Francis Libermann Catholic High School logo.svg. 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) 22:13, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I really give up - Leaving this project in my own power.

To any admins: User:Moonriddengirl, User:Secondarywaltz, User:Justlettersandnumbers, User:Eastmain - I GIVE UP. After more than five years of being a Wikipedian, I like to announce to everyone that I will be leaving this English Wikipedia project effective December 31, 2014 due to my frustrations of being blocked and risk of being banned as well as other commitments. After this date. This talk page, all my "sock puppet" accounts, and this account will be blanked and deleted. I will remain with the Wikimedia Commons and will return sometime in the future.

Thank You, Goodbye and bid adieu.

FreshCorp619 (talk) 03:33, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Final Anointment

The following message that may be declared offensive, frustrated, or any arguments that are depicted here do not reflect those of this user, Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales.

First request

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).

FreshCorp619 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

"Six month standard offer" isn't doing well at well at all. If User:Moonriddengirl, User:Justlettersandnumbers or User:Eastmain. You people are no help. You have never unblocked me but I am not a SOCKMASTER at all. Stop accusing me of being a sockfarm. I don't really give a damn if I run one!! FreshCorp619 (talk) 00:45, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

One request at a time, please. Max Semenik (talk) 09:47, 28 March 2015 (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.

Second request

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).

FreshCorp619 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I repeat, I have been blocked since October 2013. And this BS has totally gone nuts. I am not leaving this spot until I get what I deserve. I am NOT A TROLL nor a LOSER. Just go ask this clown, User:Hum1969 here. He is the meatpuppet. Give me a ban via WP:ANI or GIVE ME DEATH if no unblock is done. FreshCorp619 (talk) 00:45, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

One request at a time, please. Also, how that user is even related? Max Semenik (talk) 09:47, 28 March 2015 (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.

Third request

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).

FreshCorp619 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Without a fight, no one could offend a God. Three choices if no unblock is made: Topic ban, banned from either here or all Wikimedia projects, or a lock me out entirely. You know what if none of this damn crap works, go f--- yourself and f--- Wikipedia!! I am quitting in protest for failing to fufill my request. This account must be deleted! FreshCorp619 (talk) 00:45, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

One request at a time, please. Also, unblock requests with insults are never considered. Max Semenik (talk) 09:47, 28 March 2015 (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.

Fourth and final request: ULTIMATUM

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).

FreshCorp619 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

As I said on the first three unblock requests, I have no collateral damage towards Wikimedia, User:Jimbo Wales or anyone working here. So as I said, I am sorry everyone offended. I just wanted by editing privileges back here and an unblock becaue I want a topic ban on schools instead of an six-month offer. Just wanna move to other areas on the Wikipedia. FreshCorp619 (talk) 00:45, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining this request because it's bizzarre, contradictory (so are you leaving us or wish to be unblocked?) and demonstrates the same problem with immaturity that got you blocked in the first place. Talk page access withdrawn. Max Semenik (talk) 09:47, 28 March 2015 (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.

Conclusion

As many Wikipedia editors are good people, I have expressed my incrustation and frustration towards the following people: User:Moonriddengirl, User:Justlettersandnumbers, User:Eastmain, or User:Jimbo Wales. My six month sockpuppet ban was up under my last IP that I was banned on dated October 2013. I just wanna give a shout out to them. They are really good people but not bullies at all. I'd rather quit (or banned from) Wikipedia altogether if I don't get my unblock request done. My unblock has to be exchanged for my proposed topic ban on schools. And User:Moonriddengirl, RBI doesn't work, take this to ANI for my topic ban. Peace out. FreshCorp619 (talk) 00:45, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Still socking

And quite actively. I'm working on some cleanup (I won't revert everything you've done through your various IPs, but some of it - and you know anyone can at any time) and necessary article protections now. As your talk page access is gone now, you need to use alternative methods of requesting an unblock. Explaining why you won't respect your block is going to continue to be your challenge. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:11, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:BMTCSS logo 2012.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BMTCSS logo 2012.svg. 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) 03:32, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:BCNCHS Logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BCNCHS Logo.svg. 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) 17:27, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Trailerhead 2008.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Trailerhead 2008.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) 17:59, 12 June 2017 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

FreshCorp619 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #21343 was submitted on Apr 26, 2018 15:45:34. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 15:45, 26 April 2018 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

FreshCorp619 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #21948 was submitted on Jul 01, 2018 00:38:22. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 00:38, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:ARCSS Logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ARCSS Logo.png. 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) 18:24, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Nick Dixon (Canadian journalist) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nick Dixon (Canadian journalist) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Dixon (Canadian journalist) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 17:37, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:David and Mary Thomson CI Logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:David and Mary Thomson CI Logo.svg. 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) 17:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:BMTCSS logo 2012.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BMTCSS logo 2012.svg. 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) 02:29, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:BCNCHS Logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BCNCHS Logo.svg. 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) 02:09, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of WWE NXT episodes moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, List of WWE NXT episodes, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:49, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SMCSS Logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SMCSS Logo.png. 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) 03:21, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]