User talk:Mhecky

Welcome!

Hi Mhecky! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Jorm (talk) 00:12, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DS Alert

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 any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. 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.

--Jorm (talk) 00:12, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Nikocadoavocado8.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:Nikocadoavocado8.jpeg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 19:45, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Ewhoring

Hello, Mhecky. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ewhoring, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:02, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

November 2021

Hello, I'm Citing. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Theresa Tam, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Citing (talk) 17:18, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Murder of Ahmaud Arbery, you may be blocked from editing. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:23, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Climate of Long Point

I reverted your edits to some articles where you changed the climate classification for Long Point because your given source doesn't seem to support that. Citing (talk) 16:24, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits

You do not appear to be on Wikipedia to improve the project. Rather, you have an agenda, to some extent stated on your userpage, to push particular POVs. This is a warning that if your edits, many of which have been reverted by different editors, continue to be driven by these motivators, you risk being blocked for disruptive editing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:32, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are marking almost every edit you make as WP:MINOR, which should only be used for some non-substantive changes. Related to that, you should use edit summaries to describe substantive changes you are making to articles.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:40, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tariq Nasheed

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Tariq Nasheed . Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Hipal (talk) 17:08, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean poorly referenced? It is a known fact of the type of controversies he is involved in and it seems that you are trying to manipulate what people think of his persona.

Social media commentator? He is known to promote African American conspiracy theories and there is literally no further mention of it on his page. I’m not defaming him, I’m stating what is known. He is very popular for his documentary “Buck Breaking” and zero mention of the point he expresses the most on his Twitter and works. It seems like you’re being paid or influenced to make sure nobody can elaborate on him. Mhecky (talk) 23:03, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

High-quality references are required per WP:BLP. Your personal opinions about Nasheed or me are irrelevant, but if you continue to make them the focus of your arguments, you may find yourself being sanctioned or blocked. --Hipal (talk) 00:40, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mhecky. 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 for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Girth Summit _(blether) 14:01, 16 January 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

You know that Wikipedia accounts are like 20 cents? Lol Mhecky (talk) 19:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

That's some nasty inflation. I got mine for free. Yamla (talk) 19:43, 17 January 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am requesting that my block be reviewed. I was blocked for sockpuppetry, and I admit that I was using multiple accounts for the purpose of vandalism and restoration of reverted edits. I now fully understand that this violates Wikipedia policy and wish to contribute again positively instead of dabbling in childish vandalism.

As you can see from my edit history, I did not only contribute vandalism and added information to improve articles. With this knowledge, I hope you understand that I am capable of contributing to building an encyclopedia and I am not solely here to disrupt it.

I understand how the Wikipedia process works and wish to help contribute to the site again positively and fully avoid any disruption. A checkuser can make sure that I am not abusing multiple accounts again, and if they do find out that I am, they can willfully indefinitely block me for my behavior. I am requesting that I am let to have another chance at building an encyclopedia, as I have reconciled my actions and now understand the consequences that I face. Mhecky (talk) 23:05, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I think your best bet is take the standard offer, an re-apply in 6 months time with no socking. PhilKnight (talk) 08:21, 31 March 2023 (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.