User talk:Emir214

Request

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).

Emir214 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I know I have had 3 reviews of this block, but please listen first to what I have to say. I am asserting my innocence against sockpuppetry. The Men72194 account was an impersonator, whose purpose was to mock me. Second, the password for this account was never given out. I still retain control over it. Third, I am ready to fix any strains between myself and the Tambayan Philippines community. I thought Wikipedia was about a community-building encyclopedia wherein everyone can freely contribute to. This is a chance that this encyclopedia has hope. It can redeem itself. I also have many more things I can contribute here in Wikipedia if I, and my alternate account, User:Deogene, which has not been used in any abuse, are unblocked. Please do reconsider. I also urge you to read my points and pains I endured in Wikipedia at my blog (here and here.)

Decline reason:

After having a look at the ANI thread that got you blocked, I have to agree--what you did was no different from posting your password on a message board. That's enough to keep you blocked, even without the sockpuppetry. Talk page protected. Blueboy 96 14:29, 10 February 2009 (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).

Emir214 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I still hold the account. Even though I have made another account, I would like to clear my name, by the unblocking of this account. You can send an e-mail using the Special:Emailuser function and confirm my identity by responding to your mail. You can also leave a message at my account in the Tagalog Wikipedia here.

Decline reason:

This does not address the reason for this block. Additionally, the link you provided goes to a deleted page. — Yamla 14:16, 30 October 2007 (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).

Emir214 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I never showed the password to the public anywhere, not even on my user page. To assert my control on this account, post a message to my account in the Tagalog Wikipedia here.

Decline reason:

See links in Chaser's note, offered his account to the public and CU confirmed sock puppetry. — Rlevse • Talk • 17:03, 30 October 2007 (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.

NOTE TO 2nd request:I've asked the blocking admin if he recalls what evidence there was for the block, ie, evidence of sharing passwords. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:24, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's in the second to last deleted revision of his userpage here. The same text is reproduced in this ANI thread. In any case, the editor could simply make an edit with the Tagalog account including the text "I have the same account on the English Wikipedia." and put a diff link here. However, there remains this issue.--chaser - t 16:09, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Emir214 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have not abused any accounts. User:Men72194 is not mine.

Decline reason:

I am sorry but it appears you have. You've now had 3 reviews of the block, please do not post further unblock requests. — Shell ^babelfish 07:21, 4 November 2007 (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.

Register new account

Am I still allowed to create a new account? - Emir214 09:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:Expand user article

A tag has been placed on Template:Expand user article requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:That's so raven karaoke.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:That's so raven karaoke.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:39, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:User diffcomp

A tag has been placed on Template:User diffcomp requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:ProposedWiki.JPG

The file File:ProposedWiki.JPG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

file with unclear usability on project

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 07:41, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with File:SERENATA Promotional Ad.JPG

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:SERENATA Promotional Ad.JPG.

This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F4 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 00:22, 24 April 2017 (UTC). If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Train2104 (t • c) 00:22, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]