User talk:1zeroate: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 11:34, 18 December 2013

Admin help request

Administrator help needed

Ask your question below.
If the issue requires immediate attention or input from many administrators, please go to the administrators' noticeboard for incidents instead.
If you want to edit a fully protected page, please use the edit request wizard or {{edit fully-protected}} instead. If you want an administrator to move a page, please go to Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests. If the page needs repair from cut-and-paste moves, please go to Wikipedia:Requests for history merge.
If other users can help, please use the template {{help me}} instead.
Wikipedia's Live Help IRC is notified when this template is used. Alternatively, you can join the IRC channel directly.

When help has been offered, please add the |answered=yes parameter to deactivate the template.

I have read about the option of clean start but dislike it because I do not want to make any attempt at evading responsiblity. IF I ask for another delete review will that be an improper route to continue to attempt to remove my block on participating with same editing privligies I formerally enjoyed? I have other interests in other subjects. I have a better understanding of how far off the map I was in regards to my former conduct and I am ready accept any and all help graciouslyMayYourEditBeAwesome 14:50, 17 December 2013 (UTC) Also any suggestions on further extended reading or suggestions in regards on how to conduct myself After my privliges are fully restored would be most beniffical. Thank you . MayYourEditBeAwesome 09:10, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

ALSO

Am I blocked from the privlige of particpation on all wiki-meta? The unified login suggests I can particpate but would that be in violation of whats going on here? I don't wanna break anymore conventions and norms. MayYourEditBeAwesome 11:34, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi, although I'm not an admin I have been around the block a few times and so know a thing or two. With regards to block requests, there isn't a real limit to the number of times you can make an appeal. However, admins will not view favourably repeated requests that a)fail to address why you were blocked in the first place, b) show no clear proposed path forward and c) are too long or poorly worded (not because they're grammar nazis but because badly worded requests usually are a sign that the requester is not a native speaker, which is a fundamental skill needed to collaborate here). One approach is to agree to refrain from participating in areas that got you into trouble in the first place, a topic ban in wiki speak. Another is to propose that you seek mentorship to attain wiki-experience and knowledge from another experienced editor. These are not the only options but are ones that new editors who get themselves into hot water can try. Blackmane (talk) 16:00, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wanna continue editing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editor%27s_index_to_Wikipedia

I dont wanna be like these people http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB125893981183759969

Their are so many red names around here from honest well meaning individuals that got fed up with buracracuy and left. I can't even polish up my user page currently and I'd like too. , I'd like to continue editing all sorts of things and if that means yall reqire me to stay away from certian subjects I am prepared to stay away from certain subject. I am gonna need alittle more trust though Jimbo Whales says he trusts me. You can follow his lead. My purpose is not to be a disruptor.

I reiterate , I Have no desire to be a disruption. I would just like to enjoy the sacred trust that Jimbo Whales talks about on his user page. Blocking people like me feels exclusionary. I never meant to be the disruption that I had been. Now that I have Identified the areas of contention I can act in a better manner.

If you allow. Some say I'll have to wait six month. Others say I will have to wait a year. I do not want to do a PRISON SENTENCE over editing

It feels so rough.Yeah,the action has emotional consaquenceses. If I am no better than anyone else here then I am worthy of the trust.

This user is asking that his block be reviewed:

1zeroate (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My reason for request is so that I can clean up my user page, and continue editing in accordence with wikipedia guidelines and policies. I acknowledge my past unacceptable behavoir and affirm here that I will not continue in that vein again. At the same time I do not want to do a prison sentence of waiting time to be allowed to edit again.You pay nathiong to trust me, risk nothing to trust me. All I am asking is to have a little faith and trust in me and my word that I am being honest and well meaning with no intention to be a disruption ever again

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2= My reason for request is so that I can clean up my user page, and continue editing in accordence with wikipedia guidelines and policies.  I acknowledge my past unacceptable behavoir and affirm here that I will not continue in that vein again. At the same time I do not
want to do a prison sentence of waiting time to be allowed to edit again.You pay nathiong to trust me, risk nothing to trust me. All I am asking is to have a little faith and trust in me and my word that I am being honest and well meaning with no intention to be a disruption ever again |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1= My reason for request is so that I can clean up my user page, and continue editing in accordence with wikipedia guidelines and policies.  I acknowledge my past unacceptable behavoir and affirm here that I will not continue in that vein again. At the same time I do not
want to do a prison sentence of waiting time to be allowed to edit again.You pay nathiong to trust me, risk nothing to trust me. All I am asking is to have a little faith and trust in me and my word that I am being honest and well meaning with no intention to be a disruption ever again |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1= My reason for request is so that I can clean up my user page, and continue editing in accordence with wikipedia guidelines and policies.  I acknowledge my past unacceptable behavoir and affirm here that I will not continue in that vein again. At the same time I do not
want to do a prison sentence of waiting time to be allowed to edit again.You pay nathiong to trust me, risk nothing to trust me. All I am asking is to have a little faith and trust in me and my word that I am being honest and well meaning with no intention to be a disruption ever again |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

MayYourEditBeAwesome 04:08, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I am willing to do whatever you like, I definitly going to stop recklessly editing. I just don't want to be excluded for months maybe years over over a lesson that is understood. MayYourEditBeAwesome 04:08, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Welcome

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Someone using this IP address, 1zeroate, made test edits on the page Laura Poitras which have been reverted or removed. If you did this, please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. If 1zeroate is a shared IP address and you did not do this, you may wish to consider getting a username to avoid confusion with other editors and further irrelevant notices.

Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Here are some other hints and tips:

I recommend that you get a username. You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free and non-intrusive, requires no personal information, and there are many benefits of having a username. (If you edit without a username, your IP address is used to identify you instead.)
When using talk pages, please sign your name at the end of your messages by typing four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username (or IP address) and the date.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or type {{helpme}} here on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Widefox; talk 00:25, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:03, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your editing

Two things you should look at:

WP:INDENT - how to reply to a talk page post
WP:RD - The reference desk, the place to ask for things to be explained

Spinning Spark 20:45, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 22:41, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copy and paste

I have removed your recent copy and paste of an article here. User talk is not a place to permanently store deleted (or might be deleted) articles. If you want a personal copy, copy it to somewhere offline. On the other hand, if you want to work on the article after it is deleted to try and make it acceptable then there are better ways of doing it. Cut and paste has problems with the licensing of the work since the edit history has not been moved with it. There are ways around this, but a better solution is to open an account and then ask an administrator to USERFY the article. This can be requested at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion or to someone in Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles. Spinning Spark 12:37, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still trying to figure out how to use the sandbox 108.247.104.253 (talk) 21:42, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SANDBOX is very temporary, a bot regularly wipes it. If you want a more permanent sandbox you should register an account. Spinning Spark 00:37, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That completely and entirely defeats the purpose of "anyone can edit" alas... times change things change... nobody can stop change... I may end up registering.... 108.247.104.253 (talk) 03:01, 11 December 2013 (UTC) I did.[reply]

Only need to sign your name on talk pages

Hi 1zeroate, thanks for your edits to New Braunfels, Texas! Just FYI, you only need to sign your name using four tildes ( ~~~~ ) to edits on talk pages in Wikipedia. If you sign to edits on article pages, then your name actually ends up in the article text! (I removed your signature from the New Braunfels article.) Anyway, thanks again for your edits. Nice work. Brycehughes (talk) 11:52, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1zeroate, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure!

The

Adventure

Hi 1zeroate!! You're invited to play The Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive game to become a great contributor to Wikipedia. It's a fun interstellar journey--learn how to edit Wikipedia in about an hour. We hope to see you there!

Play The Wikipedia Adventure

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:36, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 08:40, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

volume=26|issue=3 |year=2007|pages=257–274|pmid=17886012|doi=10.1080/15368370701580806}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|author=Mooney, V |title=A randomized double-blind prospective study of the efficacy of

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:43, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Novocure for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Novocure 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/Novocure 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. Zad68 03:42, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Hell in a Bucket. I noticed that you made a comment that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. "He's a tag teamer too so youknow... if you watch him I fully expect J** or user Se****** to join in afterwards..." is also a blatant assumption of assumption of bad faith Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:15, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please be careful about what you say to people. Some remarks, such as your addition to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Electromagnetic therapy (alternative medicine) (2nd nomination) can easily be misinterpreted. Wikipedia is a supportive environment, where contributors should feel comfortable and safe while editing. Thank you.

Your post of "That was unnsessesary, the people doing the counting are intellegent enough to see that.Passive agreesiveness is a bad thing. No bueno. Raise your arm to the sky and get high and sing with me." is inappropriate. You might want to consider stepping back from the conversation. ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 05:23, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Skidmore College, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anthony Holland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Hi there. I have blocked this account's editing privileges. If you were a newbie I would take a different tack, but I noticed you saying here that you have "years of experience" with MastCell, yet this account was only started recently. Do you have other named accounts? If you do you should stick to one account. If you merely mean you have edited as an IP then you should know better about how our project works. If you want another admin to review the block, please feel free to post {{unblock|your reason here}} but you should read WP:GAB first. --John (talk) 20:09, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello John, I mean to directly address your concerns here. I do not have other named accounts. I understand only the most basic things

about our project and I obviously have much to improve upon regarding my standards of communication and conduct on talk pages. I understand I have been doing it wrong by the concensus of many as laid out on many wiki pages. I hope that I will be unblocked and if you would like me to address any further concerns please do not hesitate to let me know. MayYourEditBeAwesome 05:52, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

This is an edit to make it known that Zad68 may most certainly reach out to me for discussion on my talk pages.It was wrong of me to ask

you not to do so. In multiple ways. My apoligies and since understand more wikiexpectations regarding condoct and standards, I hope to be able to edit together again soon. If I can address any of your further concerns, please do not heasitate to let me know and I shall do so

This edit is to include and invite Loriendrew to leave any comment or edit any part of my talk page or any page on wikipedia. It was quite wrong of me to ask anything other wise. I will amend my errors if able. MayYourEditBeAwesome 15:04, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

This is an edit to include MastCell,Seppi333,Quadell,AndyTheGrump, and any and every other administrator who may of had the interesting

experience of dealing with me upto this point. I was under a wrong impression regarding my standards and conduct on the various pages of wikipedia here and on various articles here. My scope of interest may be unlimited but I am more inclined to stick with what I know. That said I understand I must go about it a better way. I do harbor many unchanged concerns however I do not intend to allow those concerns to compel me to act in the incorrect manner I had been. Their are many places I disagree with many folks and I desire to resolve and amend contested intention in a more acceptable manner. A better more proper manner becoming the guidelines and policies of wikipedia. If I can address any concerns on your ppart about me , don't hesitate to let me know. MayYourEditBeAwesome 07:22, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

This is an edit to include and address the concerns raised by JamesBWatson. My previous actions are undenablable innappropriat. That particular

edit you cite I am unsure about. The could of been my wife too. We were still legally married and living together at that time. Regardless of that factor I accept that it was not a good edit improvement. Further I readly admit that I have much room for improvment by looking at my past Pecident(sp) is against me. I want to convince anyone reading this that I am ready to show a higher level of respectful, polite , interaction on wikipedia . For as long as I am allowed the privlige to edit here. And hopefully expand the privlige back past my talk page. Also , I affirm by my Identity that I have recently shared , that, this is my one and only account. I do not desire to be a disruptor or vandaliser. If you have any concerns I and address or suggestions for me Please feel free to address me if you like. MayYourEditBeAwesome 06:53, 17 December 2013 (UTC)MayYourEditBeAwesome 06:55, 17 December 2013 (UTC)MayYourEditBeAwesome 06:57, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

NOTE: I read that blocking is about protecting wiki from disruptive edits again. It occurs to me that I am in no way attempting to be a disruption. I am not being punished. I am being considered a disruption. My apoligies for the misunderstanding and let me assure you that I am not trying to be disruptive. I do not desire to be a disruptor. MY apoligies if I have and my sincer promise to work on improveing myself

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).

1zeroate (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My edits have not been disruptive,I have no idea why I am blocked. If we are not to bite the newbs heads off why start me off with a perm ban? I have edited here off and on over the years but my skills and know how are not on the level of professinal wikieditors. I am somewhere inbetween a newb and an old hand. I do go after easy edits more often. Things I know should not be challengeable. Like when I check the reference of Novocure on the FDA approval no where did I find the wording "last resort" to quote: "The device, manufactured by Novocure, is called the NovoTTF-100A System and is meant for adults with glioblastoma multiforme that recurs or progresses after chemotherapy and radiation treatment." so this means that the other stuff should be tried first but this does not imply that the novocure system is a "last resort" the words do not even appear as referenced. Such style of writing leads to give the read the idea that this is a modality to be avoided if possible as it is one of "last resort" according to the article. IN TRUTH it should always be included in chemo and radiation treatments because of the improved effectiveness it provides in conjuction with those modalities. But I am being strongly discouraged from pointing out netrual things like that. A small but prominent clique of wikieditors are working to target me personally and some of the kinds of articles I would work on. I try to stick to subjects I know. Occasionally I make mistake. If good faith is assumed then a permenate ban or indefinite ban seem egregiously over the top. I may want to advance knowledge on certain subjects but not at the cost of true , reliably sourced, and verified reliablity. If we can't prove it via 1st ,2nd,and 3rd sources then we do not have creditblity and lacking creditblity makes our word and/or the word of the article worthless and useless as a tool to help improve knowledge. Wikipedia is all about improving our knowledge base,Humanities knowldge base. We do this by working together and not against one another. Even though I feel many strains of oppistion I still understand the afor mentioned quality of collaboration .I'd like to be restored with my editing privliges and be given full faith that I am acting in good faith in aderence to the basic princables and philospohies of Wikipedia.

Decline reason:

As noted above your account of your own knowledge of Wikipedia policies (and as further evidenced by this TL;DR unblock request; thank God I realized there's an easier explanation for the block!) suggests you are not the newbie your edit history would want to suggest. So, as the blocking admin asked, what up with that? — Daniel Case (talk) 21:14, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)/concurrance This user has not addressed the concerns of the blocking admin, even in a very long reply. Looking over the user's activity, it appears to be a single-purpose account with no interest in NPOV. Nearly all edits in article-space decrease the quality of the articles in question, and edits in non-article space make rambling and evidence-free accusations against other editors. I don't believe an unblock of this account would benefit Wikipedia in any way. – Quadell ^(talk) 21:19, 16 December 2013 (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.

How am I supposed to address you?*daniel case,The the above is too long to read and you don't care then I feel like I am trapt at the mercy of those with power to harm and hinder me with no abilty to help myself.

John or john bot applied an AUTOBAN based on me saying I had years of experence with mastcell despite being newly registered. As an anon editor I had the one account. I do not sock. I do not use multiple accounts. Sometimes I do edit from other computers but I do not cheat. This is my one and only registered account. I registered for the extra privliges and responsiblites. I hope that was short enough to care about paying attention too. I sincerly do. Because if I am not worth your attention or care I would much rather prefer some that does care.

If I got this wrong again my apoligies. I am working my best to do it right. Reading , following instructions when I can. Some help links seem broken. MayYourEditBeAwesome 05:43, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

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).

1zeroate (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

If I have acted out of turn I acknowledge that with the appeal to be allowed to correct any mistakes on my par.This is my only account.I do not sick.I do not cheat. I would like to be unblock by the Autoban because this is my only account. I gave up my anon status to formally register myself to enjoy the same privliges I used to enjoy as an anon editor. With that I am learning new things. Please note I am trying my best to do the right thing , follow instructions and prompts. I may not be accomplishing it all correctly but I am doing my upmost best to correctly follow instruction and particpate in a proper manner as expected by you and WIKIPIEDA. I want to play in your sandbox in the sand. I understand that I have to be nice to you and play by your rules. I may not understand everything but I !AFFRIM! that I am doing my best to play nice by the rules. I am completely willing to try even harder. If I have acted out of turn I acknowledge that with the appeal to be allowed to correct any mistakes on my par.This is my only account.I do not sick.I do not cheat. I would like to be unblock by the Autoban because this is my only account. I gave up my anon status to formally register myself to enjoy the same privliges I used to enjoy as an anon editor. With that I am learning new things TalkFirstThenEdit (talk) 22:07, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I have looked at the editing history of this account, the editing history of an IP address that you say you have used (and everything about the editing strongly suggests that you and only you have used it), and the editing history of another IP address that seems closely allied (it geolocates to the same area, it has edited the same pages, it has expressed the same opinions, it uses exactly the same idiosyncratic English). Unfortunately, while for the most part your statement "I am trying my best to do the right thing" seems valid, trying to do the right thing and doing the right thing are not the same. You edit contentiously, plugging a point of view and failing to take in the essence of what others say; you persist despite clear consensus against you; you make unsubstantiated accusations against other editors; your editing frequently contains non-sequiturs and failures to get the point; you sometimes either refuse or are unable to follow Wikipedia policies and guidelines; your English is often very poor, which doesn't matter much in talk pages, but it does in articles. I have also seen content you have added to articles which does not appear to be your own writing at all, suggesting copyright infringements, though I have been unable to find any sources to confirm that. Most of the problems seem to be caused by a lack of understanding of what you are doing, rather than any ill-intention, but there are occasional exceptions, such as this edit, which I find hard to see as anything other than vandalism, and there have been occasions where the two IP addresses I have referred to above have supported one another in discussion. It all adds up to the conclusion that, unfortunately, whatever your intentions, your contributions are not a net positive for the project. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:33, 17 December 2013 (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.

Don't be afraid to edit – anyone can edit almost every page, and we are encouraged to be bold!

MayYourEditBeAwesome 04:10, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure how long I shall have to wait for further communication from administration. Or how large the administration is.I understand that some administratiors have very negative opinions of my edits or maybe me. I would prefer to think it was my edits because we all just want to improve our knowledge base. I am reasonably sure that a minority of one or two administrators may remember me from years of interactions on wikipedia. I am an occasional editor and I do maintain interests in things I know something about. Sometimes a stray outside my knowledge base of editing on wiki but that tends to be risky for me in terms of whether or not I improved things. I am here to help improve things not to make things worse or act in a disruptive manner.

I prefer to stick to my knowledge base so that I there is less risk of me making unconstructive edits. I have recently been more active updating wikiarticles because of advances in the areas of subjects I know something about. Some of these subjects are controseveral and people have strong opinions on what the content should and should not contain. In accordence with wikistandards of course.

And over time standards change, some standards relax while other standards stiffen and we agree by the common plurality of it all. The concesus.

I understand the desire to keep disruptive edits to a minumum and I think I may of misunderstood certain areas of wiki like the deletion pages ,the unblocking pages, I am not sure if I wrote correctly at the village pump, I am not sure if I wrote correctly at the Senkaku island dispute talk page. I am certain I have to change a number my particular behaviors on talk pages now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines

This particular moment of ignorance has ended and now I an duely informed. Be that as it may . I believe it reamins your decision. The further I read the more I see things to improve upon. I would like to be known that it may take awhile for me to bring myself up to good standards. I clearly have many points to improve upon. If you allow , I would work on them. TalkFirstThenEdit (talk) 03:28, 17 December 2013 (UTC) I have changed my signature to not encourage improperly. MayYourEditBeAwesome 03:32, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is never my intent to break something of good value and worth. I do not mean to be disruptive. Where I asked for citations I explained why in edit summaries. Where I was quick to blank something out I had valid reason. Like on the born rich talk page where ... after double checking on it I see the administration already took care of that problem because I do not see it in the history Thank you.

(On an aside with that note ;I would still highly recomend anyone adding a note there on that talk page os as to not repeat that mistake ,which has been corrected by the administration.)

I am currently trying to figure out how to seek out further communication and review of my indefinite block. I noticed an IRC option but I avoid chat rooms at all costs cause I have problems with chat. Not unwilling to overcome problems but a major preference to use every other means I can if I can as long as it is reasonable and useful in assiting my unblocking.

I should add another point that I have other IP ranges I have posted from. In Houston. I have every intention of linking it to my user page. The IP is 98.something

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/98.200.208.230

The following two were from my former wifes' computer.MayYourEditBeAwesome 07:12, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/69.153.62.70 MayYourEditBeAwesome 07:53, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/64.122.235.18 MayYourEditBeAwesome 08:24, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And others as I find them. It would be of assistence to let me know how I could improve on "improving things" in the future as soon as my block is lifted and my editing privliges restored should John and the administration supporting him approve.

I was looking at intoduction 2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Introduction_2 and I had the ephaniy that a nod to proper nettique might be polite to place around there. Not me though. That is one of those pages I would never touch. It is helpful, it is good. Their are ten thousand well trained wikimonkeys ready to activate dantes wrath for those that dare to mess it up.

Makes me think about imaginary parts (shudder)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars

Well what the heck you might as well know what I am reading about while I wait. I've glossed over it as the many changes of the years change wikipedia. So many changes . One thing I don't want to change is my ability to edit. An indifinite block is akin to putting a bullet into a persona. My 1zeroate is a comatose vegtable able to hear and see and but not speak but boy howdy can it feel. :'(

Back to the story of the five pillars.

My current reading materials https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines

Articles I glossed over https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editor%27s_index_to_Wikipedia yeah, that was technical

Wow, I think I may of used the done marker too soon. If there is more I should review to correct and improve my behaviors and standards of conduct please feel free to inform me if you like. I have looked over the conflict of interest section. That is a grey area for me as I obviously know something about my subjects of interest. And my email I am using. I do own devices. I do not promote them here. No original research. Holland has original reseach but he should not edit about it himself right? And he had a page here when I first looked. I took it upon myself to do what I am guilty of accusing others of. I looked after the article or baby sat it.

I did not want Anthony Holland (composer) to lose the article page someone else had made regarding who he is and what he does or did because of me and yet, I did want to share and inform and improve.

I had watched the rife page devolve. Others noted the devolution and discussed it before me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:AJRG#Royal_Rife_Talk

With novocure coming about I thought maybe that it would lend credit to things I have an interst in and a broader range of medical topics.

This means to me that I have an interst period. Is it a conflict? I would like to include NPOV information on the subjects I know something about , especially in the light of the fact of many who also know something on the subjects who may not know the same information I know. To share this information I intend to abide by the guidelines and polices of wikipedia. I agree to behave. I can not improve things for the better if I continue to act in a disruptive manner as I have in the past. My real name is Russell Shipp. I am willing to show and share my commitment to act by my real identity that I show some good faith demonstraitably .

I am here to add to the knowledge base of humanity. This part of the internet. Wikipedia. I am also a Member of the rifewiki as a member of peter walkers' rife forum. I do not edit much about rife often anymore so I do not use the rifewiki there often. I was editing about Anthony Holland and other stuff that caught my interest as time passed. I was here to keep some of those articles balenced. To improve where I could.

I am unsure if my desire to keep those subjects of my interest "balenced" qualifies as a conflict of interest or not? I would want and seek advice about it ,if allowed to continue to particpate as a contributer to the wikipedia project. MayYourEditBeAwesome 11:53, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Done OK I have read stuff and checked my email now. Thank you for your time and attention and I shall be here patiently awaiting the decision.

Be Well.MayYourEditBeAwesome 07:36, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

TalkFirstThenEdit (talk) 03:13, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi ! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

--

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Now all you have to do is Save it. Saving makes an edit live and public. Click SAVE when you're ready

Yes I am now fairly certain this is as far as I can go with chapter one. MayYourEditBeAwesome 04:56, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

just to let all know, I found this tool useful in a varity of ways and shall continue with the learning and training and get famialer with sandbox use .

Help Request

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

My question is : How do I best word my message to demonstrait my understanding of the depth of my past mistakes and my willingness

to behave and abide by WPGP even should that disclude me from editing any and or all subjects? Willing and wanting ,ready and waiting, eager but patient. How do I ask for another chance to constructively contribute in the best way (and abide by that way of bestness)? If this is not the right way please revert or edit out as you see fit. My request for help on how to word this is because I do not know what to say or how how to say it to my satisfaction. Trying my best to do it right here. feel free to correct. MayYourEditBeAwesome 13:45, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Reply to {{Help me}} request: Since you are involved here with several Administrators, a regular {{help me}} request is unnecessary. A regular helpful user will not, in general, be able to assist any more than the Administrators who are already engaged. — Bill W. (Talk) (Contrib) — 15:02, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You know,I don't care if this is hosted by "Langly", I still wanna use it because everyone else is. And I'll use it the way the concesus agrees upon. MayYourEditBeAwesome 09:00, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the positive contribution. Both mentorship and a topic refrain seem completely reasonable and worth trying should my editing privliges be restored. My conduct was entierly worth blocking by all means. I am hopful to prove that unblocking me is an even better choice by behaiving better. And not like I have in the past.MayYourEditBeAwesome 16:09, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Give 'em enough rope

I have quoted and inserted this here to say to anyone reading that you may feel free to take a chance on me. Wikipedia:Unblocks are cheap If I fail I can be put right back on block and disregarded . Or that may already be the case but I would like to think that this is all very fluid and apt to change like my abysmal behavior prior to the block establishment. MayYourEditBeAwesome 16:28, 17 December 2013 (UTC)