User talk:Ineedtoeditthisarticle

Talk page access revoked. If you wish to appeal this block further you will need to contact WP:BASC by emailing them directly. 04:11, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Blocked....hard

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Materialscientist (talk) 01:19, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I was being reckless and, in a sense, hugely immature. I understand that Wikipedia is a free and serious source for information, editing articles improperly is prohibited, and I apologize. If you must know the honest truth, I am majoring in MIDI-synthesis and would be happy to contribute to a related page to show that I can really give properly to the free encyclopedia movement. Seriously, just give me a page to contribute to and a time limit, and I will shock you with how knowledgeable I am on the topic. I am very well aware that I could create a new user account to do this, but I wanted to show that I am for real when I say that I can change Wikipedia for the better. I know that edits of the nature I enacted on the page "Workin' with the Miles David Quintet" are strictly prohibited, and I am unsure why exactly I thought it appropriate to communicate to administrators through that page. I promise to adhere to the user guidelines posted in Wikipedia and hope that this appeal will go through so I may do positive contribution to the Free Encyclopedia

Decline reason:

You were given plenty of warnings that your behaviour was disruptive before you were blocked, I find it unlikely you've had a sudden change of heart. I see nothing to suggest unblocking you would benefit the project Jac16888 ^Talk 01:37, 7 November 2011 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I understand your position and the amount of vandalism you deal with daily required you to make this decision, but I must appeal yet again. I understand that what I did was disruptive, and through the poor decision making I did, I continued to exhibit the 'invincible youth' mindset. The sudden block and lack of say in the Encyclopedia concerns me and I would like to have that freedom back. Perhaps if I were to have a week or two weeks to 'think' until I was unblocked before I was allowed to edit again, then it would be an agreeable consensus. I find "Indefinite" a very powerful length of time to revoke the privilege of a user

Decline reason:

Indefinite is not infinite; come back in a few weeks/months with a compelling reason for unblocking. The only edits we have to judge you on make your intent fairly clear. Kuru (talk) 01:58, 7 November 2011 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I have been blocked for a long time and therefore have had adequate time to consciously rectify my behavior. I will never again vandalize Wikipedia if unblocked. Thank you for your consieration

Decline reason:

You've been blocked for a few hours. The message give above was clear: you may appeal in a few months. Further requests at this time will only lead to your talk page access being revoked. Favonian (talk) 22:26, 7 November 2011 (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.

As explained at User talk:Theeditmonster2, I have restored your talk page access so that you can make another unblock request in three months. Note that that is the only reason for restoring talk page access. JamesBWatson (talk) 17:02, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I know I am not supposed to request an unblock until January, so I won't. This is not an unblock request. I just logged on and noted that I had received a new message. I am not sure who this "coolkidjoe" is, but that account definitely does not belong to me, period. I own(ed) four accounts: [ineedtoeditthisarticle] [ineedtoeditthisarticle2] [theeditmonster] [theeditmonster2] I have already made arrangements to reciprocate the current situation, and have not logged onto any accounts since quite a while ago. I am requesting that coolkidjoe be removed from my sockpuppet page simply because it does not belong to me. Even his/her contributions aren't formatted like I would have done them. As you can see on my other pages, I used to (I won't anymore) replace something important with other stuff that wasn't relevant, and I am trying to fix that. Please note that as a student at [Western Carolina University], I and many other students use the same wireless internet sources (especially in the University center where I made edits by theeditmonster) and some form of confusion must have been perceived. Thank you for your consideration and I hope we can clear this up soon. Ineedtoeditthisarticle (talk) 06:16, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

See you in February - if the other edit isn't you, it will be easy to tell (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:31, 20 November 2011 (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.

You have been blocked from editing your talkpage due to abuse of the unblock process. You may still contest any current block by e-mailing unblock-en-l, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

(talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:31, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

Hello, I am back after several months of reading the project and waiting for February (the date I and other administrators agreed on) to roll around so I may be unblocked. I am now formally requesting that the block on my account be removed after complying with the requests of Wikipedia's representatives and serving my time. There has been plenty of time to ponder the consequences of my actions. Thank you for your time and I hope to hear from you soon Ineedtoeditthisarticle (talk) 18:46, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This request for unblocking has been declined due to your history of vandalism and/or disruption to this encyclopedia. However, we are willing to give you another chance provided that you can earn back the trust of the Wikipedia community. To be unblocked you need to demonstrate that you are willing and able to contribute positively to Wikipedia. You can do this by:

Familiarizing yourself with our basic rules.
Read our guide to improving articles
Pick any pre-existing article you wish to improve.
- If you have trouble choosing an article to improve, see this index of articles needing improvement for ideas.
Click the Edit tab at the top of that article and scroll down past the message informing you of your block.
Copy the source of that article and paste it to the bottom of your talk page under a new top-level heading (like this: = [[Article title]] =) and save the page before you improve it.
Propose some significant and well researched improvements to your article by editing your personal copy of the article. Please note that we are not looking for basic typo corrections, or small unreferenced additions; your edits should be substantial, and reflect relevant policies.
When you are done with your work, re-request unblocking and an administrator will review your proposed edits.
- If we (including the original blocking admin) are convinced that your proposed edits will improve Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, you will be unblocked.

If you need help while working with your proposed edits, you may add "{{helpme|your question here}}" to your talk page. Thank you. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:38, 25 February 2012 (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.

And, so as per one of your original unblock declines, what is the "compelling reason" why we should unblock you? Have you been editing at other Wikimedia projects, so we can check? Have you read WP:5P and can recite it by heart? Does your current unblock request even vaguely match what you're required to have under WP:GAB? You were not guaranteed to be unblocked in February - you were advised to not come back until February, at which time you needed to convince the community to unblock you at that time (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:57, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

please unblock me. Please? It's been over 6 months

Decline reason:

Per the comments of others both above and below.Chaser (talk) 21:31, 5 August 2012 (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.

WP:BLANKING states that you may not remove declined unblock requests while sanctions are still in effect. Favonian (talk) 19:32, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ineedtoeditthisarticle, see the offer by Beeblebrox dated 25 February: please demonstrate that you're here to contribute constructively by suggesting an article improvement. Max Semenik (talk) 20:26, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

more specifically, let me state that this offer is the only way in which you will be unblocked. Please review the offer; all aspects of it need to be addressed fully.--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 21:18, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

Sooooo...any chance that I'll ever be unblocked? It's been a year now, and I know that if I make disruptive edits again, it's curtains for me. I won't even be able to get away with a second of vandalism, so isn't that enough for at least a brief unblock under supervision or something? I'm willing to discuss this with someone. I promise Ineedtoeditthisarticle (talk) 22:52, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Since you keep creating block-evading accounts, no. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 23:14, 27 November 2012 (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 reviewing admin should see User talk:IHAVEtoeditthisarticle, especially the comment "As a matter of fact, I have another account doing very constructive edits as we speak (and has been for quite some time), albeit with a far different name than these. I assure you, there will be no disruptive editing on that account. As for these, I should probably feel bad about my year of disruption. I'm sorry you guys have to deal w/ people like me. It looks as though the "i need to edit" legacy comes to an end here, because I am going to leave this in the past, and focus on my other account where good, reliable contributions are made" -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:03, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And see User talk:152.30.232.26. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:06, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

To whom it may concern, I am committing to edit wikipedia for the better. Effective immediately, I am going to take a hiatus from appealing this account's block, and allow several months (probably 3 or so) for self reflection time. When I return, I aim to make a final appeal for a chance to learn wikipedia and give back to the community (and never vandalize again). I realize that many administrators are apprehensive of my return, but I assure you, it will be a peaceful one. Keeping your eyes peeled for other sockpuppet accounts is unnecessary (as am stopping today), but is going to happen anyway. I apologize for inconveniencing the community, and will return later (rather than sooner) to make an appeal. Thank you for your time Ineedtoeditthisarticle (talk) 23:54, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Not an unblock request. Kuru (talk) 00:47, 30 November 2012 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I know you're ignoring me. I am unstoppable, you must release me eventually. Even the emperor from Star Wars said it "Release your blocks" or something like that. Please? Not even one last chance so I'll stop annoying you?

Decline reason:

I've reviewed hundreds of requests like this, and this is one of the worst I have ever seen. You are clearly not taking the process seriously and hope to get unblocked through attrition. Not going to happen. Beeblebrox (talk) 04:09, 6 December 2012 (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.

We don't unblock annoyances, we double down on their blocks. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 03:33, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note to reviewing admin: Most recent vandalizing sock from this user is User:HuahHeahHuahHahA-Huah, created 2-Dec-2012. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 03:40, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Something to note: It appears as though that double-down hasn't completely worked (unstoppable), and I would never dream of doing something to harm the system of another computer (I know the servers of Wikipedia are computers, and that deleting pages is considered 'harming' them. I am speaking colloquially). I'm not doing this to cause harm to people; I'm just doing it to get this account back

I can still talk here. This is my talk page, and I'llllll be a'postin tha messages here. Looks like the double-down was ineffective. I guess you'll have to unblock me now — Preceding unsigned comment added by Can'tstopthakrunkmachine (talk • contribs) 05:14, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ineedtoeditthisarticle for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. — MST☆R ^{(Chat Me!)} 04:39, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]