User talk:Genius404

May 2019

Hello, I'm TropicalAnalystwx13. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Hurricane Andrew have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. 🌧❄ϟ TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk · contributions) 21:03, 30 May 2019 (UTC) I'm very sorry that the article did not appear to be constructive. Perhaps the sources I used were not reliable. Thank you for fixing the issue (Genius404Genius404 (talk) 21:28, 30 May 2019 (UTC))[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

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 ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 23:27, 30 May 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).

Genius404 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I realize that I published misleading edits to both the Hurricane Andrew page as well as a page on TV shows by order of aired time. I apologize for not contributing to the encyclopedia. I will make sure that all information I post is constructive and helpful. Also, I was listed under the list of suspected sock puppeteers. This is not the case. I didn't create multiple accounts for misuse. I apologize if it appeared that way. When I was creating my account, my page was reloaded causing me to create another account. Moocow31 is not a sockpuppet of mine. It has made no edits on any articles. I would request assistance in deleting that account. Again, I apologize for abusing my editing privileges. This will not happen again. Genius404 (talk) 20:59, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your actions have demonstrated pretty conclusively you are here to harm Wikipedia. You also claim you have not set up sockpuppet accounts, but then indicate you have indeed created a sockpuppet account. Yamla (talk) 21:08, 31 May 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.

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).

Genius404 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

sorry for the miscommunication. I did not intentionally create another account to cause harm to wikipedia. There was a problem during my login process which resulted in the sockpuppet creation. There was another account on my IP Address, however I did not intentionally create a sockpuppet account to evade the block or cause harm. Again, I sincerely apologize and will make sure to make constructive, helpful, edits to Wikipedia. I admit that I was wrong to edit the Hurricane Andrew article with inaccurate information. I am also sorry for editing the TV programs article abusively. I will make sure to use reliable, verifiable sources to provide helpful information on Wikipedia. I apologize for my past actions.Genius404 (talk) 21:16, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It's difficult to take you at your word when all your previous edits, including those where you discuss your own conduct, contained demonstrable falsehoods. (OK, in one edit you added a signature; I think that one didn't add any new falsehoods to the ones already contained in the message you signed.) Huon (talk) 23:08, 31 May 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.

Again, I am giving a sincere apology. I was wrong to edit the hurricane Andrew article misleadingly. I did lie when I said I was unaware of that. I apologize for that and take full responsibility it was all my fault. Genius404 (talk) 11:28, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

Genius404 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Again, I am giving a sincere apology. I was wrong to edit the hurricane Andrew article misleadingly. I did lie when I said I was unaware of that. I apologize for that and take full responsibility it was all my fault. Genius404 (talk) 19:50, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have no chance of being trusted and unblocked right now after your deliberately destructive behavior and your lies, and I have revoked your ability to edit this talk page to save wasting more time. You might have a chance with the Standard Offer, so read that, stay away for at least six months, and then ask at WP:UTRS and see if anyone there will reinstate your talk page access to make another appeal. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:26, 2 June 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.

Standard Offer

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).

Genius404 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am making an appeal with the Standard Offer. I published misleading edits to 2 articles. These edits were disruptive and completely irrelevant to the article. I will not make any more edits that are disruptive or not contributional to Wikipedia. Genius404 (talk) 22:21, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline; you are not eligible for WP:SO, as that requires six months have passed with zero edits. When six months have passed, you'll need to additionally address your sockpuppetry (which should be fairly easy). And you'll need to address why you were deliberately introducing false information, and why you lied about doing so. Basically, you need to explain why the community should trust you now, given you went out of your way to demonstrate you shouldn't be trusted. But again, not before six months have passed. I suggest no more edits until 2019-12-02, otherwise your six month timer may be reset. Yamla (talk) 22:35, 22 November 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.

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).

Genius404 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am now making an appeal with the standard offer. I was blocked for sockpuppetry and publishing misleading edits to 2 articles with one account and 1 additional article with a sockpuppet. I deliberately introduced false information for my own personal humorous purposes. This was harmful to the encyclopedia. When I was told by a Wikipedian that my 1st edit was disruptive, I lied that I wasn't aware of this, intent on editing another article disruptively. I realized that I could have actually contributed to Wikipedia, had I not acted in this foolish manner. If I am unblocked I intend to work on articles about legal proceedings and criminal justice. I believe that my interest in these subjects could help my contributions to Wikipedia. I am requesting another chance. I will not edit any articles in a manner that is disruptive or harmful to the encyclopedia. I am looking forward to being a helpful contributor to Wikipedia Genius404 (talk) 21:18, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. Yamla (talk) 13:24, 19 December 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.

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).

Genius404 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am appealing my case with the standard offer. I have stayed away from Wikipedia for more than 6 months, and have had time to rethink my actions. The reasons for which I was blocked were sockpuppetry, and not being here to contribute to the encyclopedia. I created 2 Wikipedia accounts, Moocow31, and Genius404. I disruptively edited one article using Moocow31, about a tropical storm, and 2 others with Genius404, my main account, about Hurricane Andrew, and a list of U.S. television shows by air date. I introduced false information to the Hurricane articles, simply to mislead readers. I was told by a fellow editor that my editing was disruptive, I acted as if I was not aware of this, because I was intent on editing more articles in the same manner. I believe a topic ban on Tropical cyclones would be appropriate. On the television shows article, I added a section which listed some supporting arguments for President Donald Trump. I do have a conflict of interest in the Post 1938 U.S Politics area, and would also agree to a Topic Ban in this area. I sincerely apologize for all my behavior. I promise to not disrupt Wikipedia, or introduce false information. During my 6 month break I thought about how I could contribute. I intend to edit articles relating to the criminal justice system, and legal proceedings. I believe my interest in these topics could prove useful to Wikipedia. I would also be willing to improve any articles that need improving. I ask for a 2nd chance to prove myself as a helpful contributor. Thank you. Genius404 (talk) 19:59, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I honestly don't understand why you want to edit Wikipedia. Perhaps websites like 4chan or Reddit would be more interesting to you? But, OK, since you're asking:

This unblock request has been declined due to your history of vandalism and/or disruption to this encyclopedia. However, we are willing to give you another chance provided that you can earn back the trust of the Wikipedia community. To be unblocked you need to demonstrate that you are willing and able to contribute positively to Wikipedia. You can do this by:

Familiarizing yourself with our basic rules.
Read our guide to improving articles.
Pick any pre-existing article you wish to improve.
If you have trouble choosing an article to improve, see this index of articles needing improvement for ideas. Once you have decided on the article you will propose improvements to:
1. Click the Edit tab at the top of that article;
2. Copy the portion of the prose from that article that you will be proposing changes to. However:
  - do not copy the "infobox" from the start of the article (i.e., markup like this: {{infobox name|...}});
  - do not copy any image placement code (i.e., markup like this: [[File:Name.jpg|thumb|caption]]);
  - do not copy the page's categories from the bottom of the page (i.e., markup like this: [[Category:Name]]);
  - do not copy the stub tag (if there) from the bottom of the page (i.e., markup like this: {{Foo stub}});
3. Click edit at your talk page, and paste at the bottom under a new section header (like this: == [[Article title]] ==) the copied content but do not save yet;
4. Place your cursor in the edit summary box and paste there an edit summary in the following form which specifies the name of the article you copied from and links to it (this is required for mandatory copyright attribution): "Copied content from [[exact Name of Article]]; see that article's history for attribution."
5. You can now save the page. However, if your edits will include citations to reliable sources (which they should), add the following template to the end of your prose: {{reflist-talk}}. Once you have added the template, click Publish changes.
Now, edit that content. Propose significant and well researched improvements by editing the selected portion of the article. Please note that we are not looking for basic typo corrections, or small unreferenced additions; your edits should be substantial, and reflect relevant policies.
When you are done with your work, re-request unblocking and an administrator will review your proposed edits.
- If we (including the original blocking admin) are convinced that your proposed edits will improve Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, you will be unblocked.

If you need help while working with your proposed edits, you may add "{{Help me|your question here ~~~~}}" to your talk page. Thank you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:10, 26 December 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.