User talk:This0k

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tears (Tyla song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chorus.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FLC

Hello, I hope this message finds you well. I have an open FLC and it would mean a lot to me if you gave me your honest opinion about it. Thanks in advance. dxneo (talk) 20:59, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry I didn't see this and I'm not sure what to say but i might comment later if it's still open. Also, how long does a GA nomination take to get a response. I nominated a page for GA on Saturday and it's now Wednesday and I'm getting tired of waiting. This0k (talk) 17:52, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there something I'm doing wrong? @Dxneo This0k (talk) 19:37, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GAs can take months before they get a response. The quickest way to get your GA reviewed is if you review someone's GA and ask them to also consider reviewing yours in return. That's how people recognize you, then you won't have to wait for months in the future. dxneo (talk) 19:46, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well it clearly was far from GA..Also clearly I don't know how to even get to B rating but I did only start Wikipedia in April and that was cause I wanted to create two articles (Too Sweet by Hozier and Jump by Tyla, the latter which you brought to GA). Regardless I went in not expecting much but I will take notes of what you said and implement those in the article for Tell Ur Girlfriend, even though that article has plummeted in popularity similar to Jump, TikTok hits just aren't going to always be relevant and that's fine, it doesn't change their notability. This0k (talk) 01:43, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Tell Ur Girlfriend

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tell Ur Girlfriend you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Dxneo -- Dxneo (talk) 21:23, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Tell Ur Girlfriend

The article Tell Ur Girlfriend you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Tell Ur Girlfriend for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Dxneo -- Dxneo (talk) 00:21, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your rationales at WP:FFD

Hey there! I dunno what you've been doing at WP:FFD. I'm uncertain about how your effective your rationales are, especially ones that can be easily countered. I don't wanna bite you, and I don't intend to. I just wonder how you can understand existing rules, like WP:NFCC and WP:NFC. George Ho (talk) 08:27, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't consider myself a newbie personally I think even though I started later than others I just struggle with keeping WP:N badly, not the entire thing but a lot of points there. I think that's where you are getting mixed up and I am aware it is a policy that should be followed at all times but as I don't fully understand the notability guideline, I have to do multiple edits of my comments and feedback, For instance at the FFD for the Joan Jett song "I Love Rock N' Roll" I thought it could be kept because it's notable, I have also tried reviving redirects into articles as they got high pageviews but was told by users that that doesn't make it notable. I want to apologize for this but please understand I really struggle with that guideline and I am working on it, I go through it almost everyday and read it. But I definitely make mistakes as I presume(which I know I shouldn't have since it's against policy) that a redirect should be changed as the other is more notable but then forget that the redirect is attached to over maybe thousands of links about the other topic. I understand ALL guidelines on Wikipedia and have familiarized myself witg them but the Notability is a struggle.If you think I should take a break from FFD for the time being I will do so.This0k (talk) 09:02, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also @George Ho wanted to ask if Fair Use Critera simply does not care for WP:N because that'll probably be the most helpful thing for me to know as most of my comments at FFD, if not all are pertaining to Notability or I'm just completely getting it wrong which is probably what's actually happening so please try explain. This0k (talk) 09:30, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding files, WP:Notability guideline is about potentiality of article (NOT file) subjects and (implicitly) does not apply to non-articles, unfortunately. Not even files. You can use notability-based arguments solely at WP:AFD... and even WP:FFD, but such arguments should be about articles, includings ones using non-free files.

For image-related arguments, besides WP:NFCC and WP:NFC, how about WP:Image use policy and MOS:IMAGE? Well, there's an essay WP:AAIDD.

Umm... Rather not rely too much on popularity... and stats, especially if you wanna convert redirects into articles.

WP:V#Notability (policy) discourages non-notable topics from this project, especially if they are not covered by reliable sources. George Ho (talk) 19:08, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked indefinitely

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. PhilKnight (talk) 21:21, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

MaranoFan, firstly this is clearly calculated as you waited till it was clear I'd gone offline so you could do this. You clearly were suspicious of me for weeks now and honestly you could've simply not made your investigation. I never bothered you for you to create this and waiting till i was offline too. I originally made my block appeal(which I deleted as it has lots of inaccuracies) but realistically I would rather have this discussion more than anything else. Why did you do this? This0k (talk) 01:08, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appeal

|I originally adressed the other accounts but this is my only account I used for the longest time making mainly constructive edits and contributing positively to Wikipedia.
As of now I understand ALL guidelines of Wikipedia, specifically Wikipedia:NOT and that is clear even in my recent articles I created such where I now understand WP:MOS and Wikipedia:NPOV.
I am here on Wikipedia to create articles and be helpful and I so far feel like the months I was on Wikipedia this year I learned a lot and also helped other users such as user:Dxneo with articles and I think that's why I should be unblocked.
I truly do believe I have learned my lesson and will contribute positively to Wikipedia as I have been doing and from here forward. I feel as though I should be given another chance, if this isn't enough then I am truly sorry but I genuinely mean no harm on this website.}}

This0k (talk) 23:48, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, This0k,

I really think you would benefit from reviewing Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks and rewriting your unblock request. This request doesn't detail why you were blocked and what "lesson" you learned. You need to acknowledge why you got blocked before an admin can accept your promise not to do it again. I think this unblock request will just be declined. Also, since you were found out to be a sockpuppet, it is more appropriate to go to your original account and make an unblock request from that account. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:21, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not want the other accounts unblocked. I simply only want this account unblocked. I am also not doing frustrating standard offer but here I will re-write my block request. This0k (talk) 08:47, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

This0k (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

As this is in fact my third Wikipedia account, I believe I should be unblocked as I have learned more than before about Wikipedia. Did I create an account and shouldn't have yes, will I do it again, nope. I had this as my only account I used for the longest time making mainly constructive edits and contributing positively to Wikipedia.

2. Firstly, I would like to specifically be unblocked on this account as the other two are not really very accessible at the moment. All accounts are me. I made my account Thatsoddd during a time last year where I knew absolutely nothing about Wikipedia. I got banned for WP:DHT and failure to understand multiple issues such as using IPs on the same pages as my account by administrator Valeree. I made my next account Everybodyyy in January after my other appeal failed. I was quickly blocked and then made this account. I was aware that I had to wait six months but didn't want to. As for now a year later I understand ALL guidelines of Wikipedia, specifically Wikipedia:NOTand that is clear even in my recent articles I created such where I now understand WP:MOS and Wikipedia:NPOV.

3. I am here on Wikipedia to create articles and be helpful and I so far feel like the months I was on Wikipedia I learned a lot and also helped other users such as Dxneo with articles and even tried to help Maranofan, the user that started this investigation and I think that's why I should be unblocked. I truly do believe I have learned my lesson and will contribute positively to Wikipedia as I have been doing from here forward. I also do not want the other accounts unblocked only this one and I am not doing the standard offer. This0k (talk) 09:01, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

We don't normally unblock sock accounts. Ideally, you should make this request from your original account, and if you would then prefer to use this account going forward, we can talk about that. That's probably not the most important concern here, though. I'm an admin and I wouldn't say that I understand ALL rules and policies, there's more than you probably think. We don't need you to understand every single rule, but we do need you to heed community advice and instructions. By refusing to abide by the standard offer you are demonstrating that when you find a rule or instruction frustrating you will just ignore it. We need a show of good faith that you can abide by guidelines and instructions without just creating new accounts. I don't think you are going to find an admin willing to unblock you without following the standard offer. My advice is to use that time to edit a Wikimedia project where you are not blocked; lots of projects need help- and constructive edits in other projects will only help you get unblocked here. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 10:27, 18 December 2024 (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.