User talk:Thomasarrango

Welcome!

Hello, Thomasarrango, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as David Straange, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Jupitus Smart 18:01, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of David Straange

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on David Straange requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Jupitus Smart 18:01, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

June 2017

Hello, I'm Jupitus Smart. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Neo-minimalism have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Besides most newcomers don't cite WP:DNB suggesting you are probably not one. Jupitus Smart 18:18, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, I used no form of propaganda or puffery. I cited it because in fact I, sir isn't the newcomer, which make the 'appearing' claims false.

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Neo-minimalism. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Don't add the name, unless a proper reference cites his name as an exponent of this school of art. The current list of artists mentioned have been sourced from the inline reference and David Straange is not in the reference. So unless you can provide an independent reference, don't change it Jupitus Smart 18:49, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, there are 17 names with only 7 references. I can't find the total 17 names, which I believe is a false practice. Explain what reference you need and I'll try my best to provide it

Also please refrain from making false and opinionated claims on who I am. I used WP:CAN because personal and biased attacks from you are unacceptable when you could have asked if I had such references. You sir are in the wrong.

Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from pages that you have created yourself, as you did with this edit to David Straange. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Home Lander (talk) 19:18, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's a false claim I only removed it once, this is further proof of votestacking and WP:CAN I will be print screening for further use.

edited : The statement 'please stop removing' is a biased and violent claim of indication that I'm constantly harassing and tinkering, which is completely false and will be used against you if anything happens to my account

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make a personal attack, as you did with this edit to User talk:Home Lander. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Home Lander (talk) 19:34, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tyranny and misuse of power completely false. That is no way a personal attack. You sir are personally attacking me. Print screened

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 day for harassing other users. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Alexf^(talk) 20:10, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|reason=Your reason here [[User:Thomasarrango|Thomasarrango]] ([[User talk:Thomasarrango#top|talk]]) 20:17, 13 June 2017 (UTC) Completely false claims of harassment and will be sent to your higher ups. Print Screened}}

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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here Thomasarrango (talk) 20:33, 13 June 2017 (UTC) I have emailed your higher ups and you will not hear the end of this injustice you guys are completely wrong[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 20:35, 13 June 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here Thomasarrango (talk) 4:48 pm, Today (UTC−4) PERSONAL ATTACK Racial, sexist, homophobic, ageist, religious, political, ethnic, national, sexual, or other epithets (such as against people with disabilities) directed against another contributor, or against a group of contributors. Disagreement over what constitutes a religion, race, sexual orientation, or ethnicity is not a legitimate excuse." Did I make one? No Harassment, including threats, intimidation, repeated annoying and unwanted contact or attention, and repeated personal attacks may reduce an editor's enjoyment of Wikipedia and thus cause disruption to the project. Harassment of an editor on the basis of race, sex, gender, sexual orientation, religion, age or disability is not allowed. Am I repeately attacking said 'victim'? No I only said one statement to him after I was being harassed by a slew of users. The injustice I see here today is just sickening to me and instead of being professional you turn it into a petty power struggle which is very disappointing and shameful

Decline reason:

Although I would also hesitate to characterize one talk page post as harassment, there was a transparent WP:3RR violation at Neo-minimalism that would normally entail a block regardless. - Vianello (Talk) 02:39, 14 June 2017 (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.

On a note not immediately germane to the block itself, bickering over the precise wording of an instruction to not remove speedy deletion templates, and especially using it to make nebulous threats ("will be used against you") and protests of "violence", rather misses the point. If you've done something unambiguously against the rules and been asked not to do it again, all you need to do is not do it again. You don't have to like it, of course, but arguing with people over the minutia of a template they, in all likelihood, did not write, is not going to go anywhere productive. Just a suggestion intended to be productive, embrace or disregard at your own discretion. - Vianello (Talk) 02:39, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Vianello (Talk) 02:39, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was never warned or even aware about 3RR, and 'will be used against you' in it's context is NOT a threat to cause physical harm etc. I don't care if I like something or not, truth is truth. I know this was handled very unprofessionally for me making an edit. I will feel a lot more comfortable if the reason me getting banned is because of 3RR, which I was unaware of because I didn't personally attack, harm, or harrass anyone it's dishonest and proof of very unprofessional editors.

Nomination of David Straange for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David Straange 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/David Straange until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Jupitus Smart 03:17, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Leave me alone man you're toxic

You might like to know that editors are encouraged to put notices of deletion discussions on the talk pages of article creators, as a matter of politeness. You also might take a look at Wikipedia:Civility, which is a Wikipedia policy. --Bejnar (talk) 20:48, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]