User talk:Web SourceContent

WP:UAA reports on users with no edits

Generally, there is no reason to report usernames with no edits whatsoever. Per WP:UAAI: "Wait until the user edits. Do not report a user that hasn't edited unless they are clearly a vandal. We do not want to welcome productive editors with a report at UAA, nor do we want to waste our time dealing with accounts that may never be used." The exceptions are obvious hate speech or names that attack a living person/Wikipedia editor, those are blockable even without any edits, but other run-of-the-mill violations need not be reported unless and until they at least attempt to edit, and you should be able to clearly explain what the problem is if it is not immediately evident.

For whatever reason, every day dozens, if not hundreds of accounts are created that never make one single edit. It is our responsibility as admins to conscientiously review every report a user makes at UAA, so we have to check for contribs, deleted contribs, and tripping of the edit filter for every one of these reports, only to find out there's nothing there and therefore no problem to be solved. So we add the {{UAA|wait}} tag to the report, it goes to WP:UAA/HP for a week or more, and must then be reviewed again to see if the account has since become active before removing it. That's time that could be spent doing more productive things, but you basically obligate admins to do it by making such reports.Template:Z182 Beeblebrox (talk) 18:58, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ioan Buteanu has been accepted

Ioan Buteanu, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Kpgjhpjm 10:30, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2018

• From the editor: Today's young adults don't know a world without Wikipedia

• Interview: 2018 Wikimedian of the Year, Farkhad Fatkullin

• News and notes: Flying high; low practice from Wikipedia 'cleansing' agency; where do our donations go? RfA sees a new trend

• In the media: Quicksilver AI writes articles

• Discussion report: Drafting an interface administrator policy

• Featured content: Featured content selected by the community

• Special report: Wikimania 2018

• Traffic report: Aretha dies – getting just 2,000 short of 5 million hits

• Technology report: Technical enhancements and a request to prioritize upcoming work

• Gallery: Leapfrog, historic Thai cave, and a rhythmic beat

• Recent research: Wehrmacht on Wikipedia, neural networks writing biographies

• Humour: Signpost editor censors herself

• Essay: Principle of Some Astonishment

• From the archives: Playing with Wikipedia words

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:04, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire Newsletter - September 2018

Delivered September 2018 by MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.

09:24, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Gabriel Firea

regarding [1], please look at what you're restoring before restoring - your revert restored blatant attacks and insults on Gabriel Firea Galobtter (pingó mió) 20:37, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

@Galobtter: Ok! I seen this message, I think it was unbelievable issue that I did it on Gabriela Firea. Need to suppress all WP:BLP strikes that were started. Source Content Self-Maker (talk) 20:46, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

More info please

@Bbb23: Oh! :( You did blocking me. Source Content Self-Maker (talk) 06:38, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Five emails

Thanks for sharing your five emails with me. I have had no interaction, nor undertaken any actions on this wiki with you. If you feel that you have been unjustly blocked, then you should pursue with the blocking email, through the process at Wikipedia:UTRS, or through the resolution process of WP:ArbCom. Emailing me will have no effect as I no longer am involved in the politics of enWP, I just potter around as an admin, primarily in the anti-spam space. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:43, 28 September 2018 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

What happened to me. If there was CU block or have been suspected. Should be surprinsed, that Bbb23 demanded Tegel to lock me globally. Source Content Self-Maker (talk) 09:49, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

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) 10:04, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

---

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 is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

I am sorry for this, I am likely, but not a exact sockpuppeter of Daciproteasa09. Now I have already emailed administrator who blocked me. I trying to make useful edits, now more times have past editing Ioan Buteanu and now Alexandru Dabija. I am sure that more misuses & violations won't happen anymore.

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=I am sorry for this, I am likely, but not a exact sockpuppeter of Daciproteasa09. Now I have already emailed administrator who blocked me. I trying to make useful edits, now more times have past editing [[Ioan Buteanu]] and now [[Alexandru Dabija]]. I am sure that more misuses & violations won't happen anymore. |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=I am sorry for this, I am likely, but not a exact sockpuppeter of Daciproteasa09. Now I have already emailed administrator who blocked me. I trying to make useful edits, now more times have past editing [[Ioan Buteanu]] and now [[Alexandru Dabija]]. I am sure that more misuses & violations won't happen anymore. |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=I am sorry for this, I am likely, but not a exact sockpuppeter of Daciproteasa09. Now I have already emailed administrator who blocked me. I trying to make useful edits, now more times have past editing [[Ioan Buteanu]] and now [[Alexandru Dabija]]. I am sure that more misuses & violations won't happen anymore. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}