User talk:Useitorloseit

Hello, Useitorloseit, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Also feel free to make test edits in the sandbox.

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 need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help.We're so glad you're here! User:Goethean (talk) 01:44, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't edit Wikipedia very often

I have previously edited maybe 10 or 12 Wikipedia articles. They mostly involved classic films or politics. One major contribution (almost 50%) I made to an article is something that I think very few people in the world could have done, and now that is owned by Wikipedia thanks to me (no, I won't say what it was so you'll have to take my word for it). The edits took place in 2006, 2008, 2011, 2012, and now. I only have the whim to edit every few years, so I just created a new username each time then forgot about it. I have forgotten the passwords, usernames, or both for my previous usernames, and I never set up any password retrieval system. I have never engaged in sock puppetry, nor am I a single-purpose account. I personally feel unqualified to comment meaningfully on a wide variety of articles. Useitorloseit (talk) 17:52, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

neutral RfC notification

Template_talk:Succession_box#RfC has a discussion on succession box usage. You had previously noted or opined at Template_talk:Infobox_officeholder/Archive_18#RfC_on_successor.2Fpredecessor_where_a_district_is_not_reasonably_viewed_as_the_same_after_redistricting thanks. Collect (talk) 21:34, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Standard offer unblock request

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

I'm requesting the standard offer. It says to contact willing admins by e-mail/IRC but I can't find a list of the willing admins nor anyone's e-mails, so I'm just posting this. I have stayed away for over 6 months, and while I am not the world's most frequent Wikipedia contributor (I am not an expert on a lot of things), I believe I have made helpful contributions and can make more, and I'd like to move past the drama that took up all my time/attention before. 129.174.252.6 (talk) 17:05, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What went wrong: I made a textbook example of disrupting Wikipedia to prove a point. 1000% guilty there. After that point (mid-February 2014), I think I was a lot better at keeping to the rules, but by then there were understandably very few people who had the time/inclination to bother with me. One person who did, retired admin SGGH, noted the before/after split by saying my earlier behavior was "not particularly good" but later I had been "appropriate and diplomatic." But arguing about changing consensus for a contentious edit that is not that important was not going to convince many other editors, for obvious reasons. Going forward, to avoid a repeat of the situation I would: follow the rules very closely and ask if I was uncertain about the proper etiquette; work collaboratively and if faced with contentious editors, use the dispute resolution process and let the chips fall where they may; understand that not every edit is worth a huge amount of time fighting over; and remember that there's no time limit on improving an article so some things take time and that's fine. Useitorloseit (talk) 21:07, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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'm requesting the standard offer.  It says to contact willing admins by e-mail/IRC but I can't find a list of the willing admins nor anyone's e-mails, so I'm just posting this.  I have stayed away for over 6 months, and while I am not the world's most frequent Wikipedia contributor (I am not an expert on a lot of things), I believe I have made helpful contributions and can make more, and I'd like to move past the drama that took up all my time/attention before. [[Special:Contributions/129.174.252.6|129.174.252.6]] ([[User talk:129.174.252.6|talk]]) 17:05, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
:What went wrong: I made a textbook example of disrupting Wikipedia to prove a point.  1000% guilty there.  After that point (mid-February 2014), I think I was a lot better at keeping to the rules, but by then there were understandably very few people who had the time/inclination to bother with me.  One person who did, retired admin SGGH, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=607912726 noted the before/after split] by saying my earlier behavior was "not particularly good" but later I had been "appropriate and diplomatic."  But arguing about changing consensus for a contentious edit that is not that important was not going to convince many other editors, for obvious reasons.  Going forward, to avoid a repeat of the situation I would: follow the rules very closely and ask if I was uncertain about the proper etiquette; work collaboratively and if faced with contentious editors, use the dispute resolution process and let the chips fall where they may; understand that not every edit is worth a huge amount of time fighting over; and remember that there's no time limit on improving an article so some things take time and that's fine.  [[User:Useitorloseit|Useitorloseit]] ([[User talk:Useitorloseit#top|talk]]) 21:07, 13 August 2015 (UTC) |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'm requesting the standard offer.  It says to contact willing admins by e-mail/IRC but I can't find a list of the willing admins nor anyone's e-mails, so I'm just posting this.  I have stayed away for over 6 months, and while I am not the world's most frequent Wikipedia contributor (I am not an expert on a lot of things), I believe I have made helpful contributions and can make more, and I'd like to move past the drama that took up all my time/attention before. [[Special:Contributions/129.174.252.6|129.174.252.6]] ([[User talk:129.174.252.6|talk]]) 17:05, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
:What went wrong: I made a textbook example of disrupting Wikipedia to prove a point.  1000% guilty there.  After that point (mid-February 2014), I think I was a lot better at keeping to the rules, but by then there were understandably very few people who had the time/inclination to bother with me.  One person who did, retired admin SGGH, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=607912726 noted the before/after split] by saying my earlier behavior was "not particularly good" but later I had been "appropriate and diplomatic."  But arguing about changing consensus for a contentious edit that is not that important was not going to convince many other editors, for obvious reasons.  Going forward, to avoid a repeat of the situation I would: follow the rules very closely and ask if I was uncertain about the proper etiquette; work collaboratively and if faced with contentious editors, use the dispute resolution process and let the chips fall where they may; understand that not every edit is worth a huge amount of time fighting over; and remember that there's no time limit on improving an article so some things take time and that's fine.  [[User:Useitorloseit|Useitorloseit]] ([[User talk:Useitorloseit#top|talk]]) 21:07, 13 August 2015 (UTC) |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'm requesting the standard offer.  It says to contact willing admins by e-mail/IRC but I can't find a list of the willing admins nor anyone's e-mails, so I'm just posting this.  I have stayed away for over 6 months, and while I am not the world's most frequent Wikipedia contributor (I am not an expert on a lot of things), I believe I have made helpful contributions and can make more, and I'd like to move past the drama that took up all my time/attention before. [[Special:Contributions/129.174.252.6|129.174.252.6]] ([[User talk:129.174.252.6|talk]]) 17:05, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
:What went wrong: I made a textbook example of disrupting Wikipedia to prove a point.  1000% guilty there.  After that point (mid-February 2014), I think I was a lot better at keeping to the rules, but by then there were understandably very few people who had the time/inclination to bother with me.  One person who did, retired admin SGGH, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=607912726 noted the before/after split] by saying my earlier behavior was "not particularly good" but later I had been "appropriate and diplomatic."  But arguing about changing consensus for a contentious edit that is not that important was not going to convince many other editors, for obvious reasons.  Going forward, to avoid a repeat of the situation I would: follow the rules very closely and ask if I was uncertain about the proper etiquette; work collaboratively and if faced with contentious editors, use the dispute resolution process and let the chips fall where they may; understand that not every edit is worth a huge amount of time fighting over; and remember that there's no time limit on improving an article so some things take time and that's fine.  [[User:Useitorloseit|Useitorloseit]] ([[User talk:Useitorloseit#top|talk]]) 21:07, 13 August 2015 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

I've tweaked your block to allow editing this page - please confirm it's really you. I can post your request to WP:AN and start an unblock discussion, but a more verbose request explaining what was wrong before and how you're going to avoid it in the future would improve your chances (from your current request it's less clear ). Max Semenik (talk) 17:59, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's me. Let me know if you need more verification. I added to my post. If you could go to AN with this, I'd appreciate it. Useitorloseit (talk) 22:33, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@MaxSem: Not sure if you saw my expanded post above. Could you let me know whether my request will move forward or not? Thanks. Useitorloseit (talk) 18:33, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]