User talk:Heresthechill

Your repeated addition of content on Bored Ape

Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's rules regarding edit warring and revert your edits, as they do not meet Wikipedia's criteria. There is a reason I've reverted them before and held that Talk page discussion with you. ASpacemanFalls (talk) 16:07, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki's criteria is to use references from experts, which I have done. I know you don't agree but that's just your opinion. The idea that financial/investing experts can't speak about NFTs is quite absurd. This is our final interaction. Cheers! Heresthechill (talk) 16:41, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Standard cryptocurrency/blockchain notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in blockchain and cryptocurrencies. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

April 2023

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Onorem (talk) 20:32, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you do this again you will likely get banned. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 06:47, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Heresthechill. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Heresthechill. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Heresthechill|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. David Gerard (talk) 17:00, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, no I am not being compensated in any form for accurately describing the difference between copycats and derivatives of BAYC (just above the copycat section of the article where it is extremely relevant) or for citing a known expert in the relevant field. Heresthechill (talk) 20:22, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On the BAYC wiki "talk" page I'm still awaiting a description of the separate set of rules that exist for this article as what @Jtbobwaysf differs from Wiki guidelines. Heresthechill (talk) 20:26, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it can be found in the talk archives at Bitcoin Cash. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 21:17, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To find an alternate set of rules that differ from Wiki's guidelines I need to search the talk archives of Bitcoin Cash. Heresthechill (talk) 21:28, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, if you are not willing to WP:LISTEN to what other editors are explaining to you above and on the talk page. Here Talk:Bitcoin_Cash/Archive_3#RfC_to_tighten_sourcing_on_this_article. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 23:45, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd listen if someone was making sense but now we're talking about Bitcoin Cash. Heresthechill (talk) 00:43, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Admin help

This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.

Hello, this user has been warned multiple times about edit warring on Bored Ape which to my understanding is covered by 1RR under WP:GS/Crypto#GS. Please warn the user or give other sanction deemed appropriate. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 03:47, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To enforce community-authorised general sanctions, you have been temporarily blocked from editing. You are welcome to make useful contributions once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block. 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.

Reminder to administrators: Community sanctions are enacted by community consensus. In order to overturn this block, you must either receive the approval of the blocking administrator or consensus at a community noticeboard (you may need to copy and paste their statement to a community noticeboard).

331dot (talk) 08:46, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Heresthechill. It has been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Girth Summit _(blether) 14:33, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]