User talk:Anpang

See the archive for old posts.

December 2023

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 review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 17:23, 22 December 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

@Bbb23:

I put a comment on this post 3 days ago asking what exactly you meant by me "Clearly not here to build an encyclopedia" and you didn't respond, so I'll just go ahead and assume by your block summary, Clearly not here to build an encyclopedia; disruptive editing; trolling, that you meant this edit on UkrainianStudios' talk page, where I added "socks are cool".

I would like to clarify some stuff. UkrainianStudios is my real-life friend, and there is a running gag at our school about the phrase "socks are cool", and I just put that on his talk page. As you probably misunderstood, by "socks", I meant the word in the gag, not sockpuppets. He saw it, it was all just funny stuff, not serious, disruptive trolling. You could kinda say this is me using Wikipedia as a social networking site, but it's really not. It was just one message. And while I'd argue this is completely fine behavior and doesn't deserve an indefinite ban, I promise I won't do something like this again.

I also suspect you meant the "useless" and "disruptive" templates I created. I got 2 template deletion nominations on this same day you blocked me: {{User garlician-2}} and {{Todo box}}. For the first one, I had to put it in the mainspace because the {{#babel: tag didn't work with templates in userspace, so I also won't do anything like this again. As for the second one though, the reason was No transclusions. Created by indefinitely blocked disruptive editor.. I was going to use it on this page before I got blocked, and the second argument is just because I got blocked. Not really a good argument to delete it.

Really, I consider myself kinda deserving of this, but an indefinite block? Indefinite? Imo that's just way to harsh. It seems from your contribs page that literally everything you do here on Wikipedia as an admin is block people and ignore comments by the blocked people, so I hope you read this, even if you'll reject this appeal for one reason or another.

Thanks. Anpang01 (talk) 15:22, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Unblock requests are to ask for a third party to review, not the blocking admin. You were not just blocked for a specific edit(though the one you mention was probably the last straw). The vast majority of your edits have nothing to do with the encyclopedia from what I see, mostly to your user space and js files. Maybe there's some purpose there that I don't see, but it's not obvious to me. If you have contributions to make, please tell what those are to the next admin. 331dot (talk) 16:04, 26 December 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

I do edit articles and try to create articles occasionally, like this TheoTown draft, but it never became a live page. I make a user script, Chocolate, so I edit js files in my userspace a lot, which I believe isn't "disruptive editing" and goes into the "Focusing on particular processes" of the "What "not here to build an encyclopedia" is not" (correct me if I'm wrong).

And I promise if I get unblocked, I'll make more edits to the encyclopedia, and I won't create more templates, ever.

Also, I didn't know before this that the admin that reviews unblock requests needs to be a different admin, sorry. Anpang01 (talk) 06:19, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your userpage states I don't really edit Wikipedia, heck I'm pretty sure out of my almost 2,000 global edits, less than 10 are actual article edits. That doesn't sound like what we're here for. Please provide some specific examples of edits you'd like to make to the encyclopedia if unblocked. Also, why did you create Anpang54 and 10gnapnA? Spicy (talk) 23:00, 9 January 2024 (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 accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

As I said, make the TheoTown draft live, as there's still not an article on the game
Making redirects on stars, like HR 3243 redirect to HD 69142
Just correcting spelling mistakes. I found some while browsing but couldn't edit them

I created those alts (and User:Anpangp and User:Ohnoiforgotmypass, not sure why you couldn't IP-check or somethin) on different devices before I got blocked, and you blocked them.

The "I only made 10 actual article edits" number on my userpage is obviously an exxageration, I probably made a lot more encyclopedic edits than that.

Also, could someone explain why making user scripts doesn't go into "Focusing on particular processes"? The policy itself's a little unclear, too. I still believe that making user scripts isn't disruptive editing.

Accept reason:

can only edit while logged into the Anpang01 account.
no creating or editing templates or scripts or modules for at least six months Then you can appeal that restriction.
no creating new categories. for at least six months. Then you can appeal that restriction.
Please be very careful not to edit disruptively, even in ways not already covered. You could be reblocked without warning if any more problems arise.
It is better to discuss first then to get reblocked. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:06, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Todo box

Template:Todo box has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:59, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your claims:

I was intending to use the template on here. And, a todo box template is just useful to have.
I got blocked indefinitely doesn't mean the template needs to get deleted. I made it for both myself and the community.

And don't tell me I'm invited to talk there, because I'm obviously blocked, that's literally half of your claim to getting this deleted.

Anpang01 (talk) 10:43, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock discussion

Pro forma @Bbb23:. OK to unblock? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:48, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra: I don't see an answer to Spicy's questions.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:38, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(sigh) They're there. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:52, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Anpang01: Please clarify the answers to Spicy's questions. For instance, why did you create the two alt accounts. What other edits might you make. Thanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:56, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like the last part may be addressed already with "spelling mistakes and redirects on stars". Just these edits indeed may not be enough though. Aaron Liu (talk) 00:08, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For a while I couldn't access this laptop that's logged into this account, so I created accounts on other devices (a phone, a tablet, and another PC). I'll not do that again, sorry. I might also make edits on Thai politics and history. Anpang01 (talk) 02:09, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you might want to look up the password that you've saved and remember it, or at least sync it. Aaron Liu (talk) 02:45, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I started trying to do that for a while, right before I got blocked. I stopped using my alts like 2 months ago. Anpang01 (talk) 04:41, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello? Anpang01 (talk) 04:42, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock reviews take as much time as articles for creation these days. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:12, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on how many extraneous comments we need to wade through. @Bbb23: How 'bout now? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:54, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin: Insights, please, from random admin i recently interacted with. Thanks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:56, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aaron Liu: Actually, the backlog was > 100 at the start of the year. < 40 right this minute. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:57, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which seems to be on par with the current number of unblock requests, which also happen to be <40. Aaron Liu (talk) 19:00, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I said. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:16, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Spicy: What say ye? Are your questions adequately answered? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:17, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I'm not exactly convinced they will be a great asset to the encyclopedia, but I don't think they are malicious either, so I'm not opposed to an unblock. But it's Bbb's block, not mine. Spicy (talk) 22:45, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Still awaiting comment from blocking admin . . . . . -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:02, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should also concentrate on editing the encyclopedia and not be writing/editing scripts for at least six months. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:04, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Other accounts? Wut? Please list all accounts you've used. Thanks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:10, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He has listed them already: Along with not contesting Anpang54 and 10gnapnA, he has also listed User:Anpangp and User:Ohnoiforgotmypass.

I say if a week goes by without @Bbb23 commenting, we should unblock on condition of contributions. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:20, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1) Just checking.

2) How lovely, but I'm not sure I'll wait that long. This has been languishing for over a month. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:27, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"languishing"? As I've said elsewhere, I don't think it matters what I say as you're determined to clean up the backlog, as if that's required, and it seems that for the most part you want to unblock. So, no need to wait even a day more. Do what you wish.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:37, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, how about next Monday? Aaron Liu (talk) 15:33, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How 'bout tomorrow? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:21, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Summary of unblock conditions--

only one account
no more templates or scripts for at least six months. Then you can appeal that restriction.
no more new categories for at least six months. Then you can appeal that restriction.
???

-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:23, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Callanecc: Would you mind checking for loopholes? This is why we can't have nice things. Thanks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:32, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe wording the first one that they can only edit while logged into the Anpang01 account only. Also to clarify, do the second and third conditions mean creating them but not editing or using them? If the former maybe 'indefinite ban from creating templates, modules (I suggest adding this), scripts and categories which shouldn't appealed for at least 6 months'. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:42, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per Callanecc:

can only edit while logged into the Anpang01 account.
no creating or editing templates or scripts or modules for at least six months Then you can appeal that restriction.
no creating new categories. for at least six months. Then you can appeal that restriction.
Please be very careful not to edit disruptively, even in ways not already covered. You could be reblocked without warning if any more problems arise.
It is better to discuss first then to get reblocked.

-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:48, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I accept. Anpang01 (talk) 23:46, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Party Popper Emojipedia.png missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

File:Party Popper Emojipedia.png

is missing information on its image description page, which would help other contributors to make better use of the image, and make that page more informative to readers.

If possible, please add this information, otherwise the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided. Please also consider updating other files you created or uploaded, You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you.

Kys5g^talk! 15:25, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]