User talk:Agent Ross

Welcome!

Hello, Agent Ross, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to SCP Foundation. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! L3X1 My Complaint Desk 21:03, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017

Hello, I'm L3X1. I noticed that you made a change to an article, SCP Foundation, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 21:03, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Tsardom of Phokland

The article Tsardom of Phokland has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Only references are to user generated content or Google Maps (showing where the town of Gilbert is, so unrelated to this micronation). Appears to be here to promote a non-notable organization. Lacks any independent, published sources.

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}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 23:13, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Tsardom of Phokland

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 Tsardom of Phokland 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 club, society, or group that 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 deleted 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. Tracy Von Doom (talk) 23:21, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 01:50, 19 September 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am aware that I made an edit that got reversed. I assure that I am here to help build an encylopedia. Am I aware that I did not use proper citation on Vikesland's article? yes, I am aware now. Will it happen again? No. It will not. I see what I did (both there and with the Phokland page) and will work to not do that again. Agent Ross (talk) 15:20, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Confirmed abuser of accounts but not likely Leon. Likely to Mr. Emperson (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) as they are on the same IP address and writing about the same faux micronation. This is now a checkuser block.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 20:34, 2 October 2019 (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.

Bbb23 I have a feeling that this one is a sock of Leon103102, judging by the genre of articles Agrent Ross focuses on. It's probably best to leave them blocked. Lupin VII (talk) 17:40, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Lupin VII: Then you should add this user to the list at the report you filed with evidence of the connection.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:17, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Bbb23 pardon my french, but who the frick is Leon? I have no idea who this is and I sure as hell aint a sockpuppet account. Any way I can prove it, I will.--Agent Ross (talk) 00:49, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ignoring the possible sockpuppetry for the moment, you say above that you see what you did and that you will work to not do that again. What is "that", and what will you do differently if you are unblocked? Huon (talk) 16:10, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well Huon here is what I plane to do. Firstly, what "that" was, was the fact that I made edits without sighting proper sources, in addition to general un-encyclopedic behavior (most of which included un-helpful edits and creating pages that were not properly sourced, or sourced from dubious primary sources). If unblocked, I plan on not only checking before I edit (on the factual accuracy and benefits of my edit), but also to not create things that (put simply) do not belong on Wikipedia.--Agent Ross (talk) 19:50, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hope I explained things well enough Huon. Also, I had time to read into that whole "sockpuppeting" thing, and yes; while I am interested in many of the same things as that fellow, I assure you that I am not him.

October 2019

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

— Berean Hunter (talk) 20:34, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]