User talk:Rancalred

Previous unblock requests collapsed.

Welcome!

Hello, Rancalred, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as United East Pacific, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! jsfouche ☽☾Talk 17:32, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of United East Pacific

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as United East Pacific, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. jsfouche ☽☾Talk 17:32, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to be helpful i will do somthing about this ASAHATP --Rancalred (talk) 17:41, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of National Transitional Department

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 National Transitional Department requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Singularity42 (talk) 19:33, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Speedy at National Transitional Department

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from National Transitional Department, a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion and appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 19:44, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

lay off the bad edits

You've been here three days, and most of your edits have been reverted or deleted. This should tell you you're doing something wrong. Normally I should give you a gentle welcome message and point out your errors, but you're going so hell-for-leather with no regard for anything around you that I need to wake you up.

Your image is a copyright violation, and will soon be deleted from Commons.
Your image is not superior, it is worse than the existing one.
Calling something a "department", just because it suits your view of what organizations are called if they have logos, make you look like you're trolling or pulling a bad joke.
As does nominating the good image for deletion.

If you continue in this vein, you will not have a happy experience here. Consider what you do before you do it. There are mentors available on Wikipedia, I can help you find one. I recommend one for you.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 00:58, 18 July 2011 (UTC) I am Really Confused the only resason my image would be a copyright violation is because the other image is exists on wikipedia That violates wikpedia policy and is gaming the system which is also aganist wikipedia policy plus , your userbox say's that you are aganist copyright paranoia so if you could please harass them instead of me (PC-0) that would work out nice. I know what your thinking , so please read the image history have a good day. --Rancalred (talk) 23:13, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2011

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Coat of arms of Libya. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Singularity42 (talk) 00:25, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stop using File:Logontcnt.png

Stop replacing the National Transitional Council's logo with File:Logontcnt.png. It is considered disruptive. You have been asked multiple times in edit summaries to stop. I am now asking you here. Singularity42 (talk) 00:29, 19 July 2011 (UTC) Okay Lets see 1. No i Havent. 2.The intentention of this is to destroy the blasted policy voilation of the file that you use you cant copyright somthing if it is only used on wikipedia now please stop being a nusiance and Delete of propose Deletion of That image. --Rancalred (talk) 22:46, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at National Transitional Council, you may be blocked from editing. Singularity42 (talk) 23:08, 19 July 2011 (UTC) grr Have you been listening if you keep this up i will[reply]

Firefox stuff?

What's with all the chatter about new versions of Firefox, "Tech City", and XO-1b systems on Talk:Libya? I haven't heard anything about that anywhere else. It seems kind of like tinfoil hat nonsense, to be honest, unless you can explain it better. -Kudzu1 (talk) 00:29, 21 August 2011 (UTC) Simple , 1. The OLPC XO-1 1.5 Laptop 2.The Xo version of Firefox is Titled "Firefox 6" 3. Since The Windows Version is now Firefox 6 ... They Must be on A unifed network 4. Before They were unifed Tech city was a go-between for data --Rancalred (talk) 19:35, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Nuclear Time Unit

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 Nuclear Time Unit, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Singularity42 (talk) 19:45, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you re-create this article? Did you read the AfD discussion first? Singularity42 (talk) 19:49, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes i did And since i am not Dale Noble I AM unbiased and i think that i can do a good job on an article of that word Making it Unaccountable for count 2 of the original AfD . --Rancalred (talk) 19:54, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please use proper indenting. See Help:Using talk pages#Indentation and WP:INDENT. Singularity42 (talk) 20:00, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter whether you were the person who published the source or not. There was a consensus at the AfD that it was self-published (i.e. something anyone can post without editorial oversight) and therefore not a reliable source on its own. If you disagree, the answer is not to re-create the article. It is to take it to WP:DRV. Singularity42 (talk) 19:58, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will try that thank you Rancalred (talk) 20:03, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 22:29, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

September 2011

Welcome and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page Gallery of country coats of arms worked, and it has been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. The file "Image:Alternate Ntc logo.png" is not a reliable free equivalent of the official NTC seal "File:National Transitional Council logo.svg". Marianian^(talk) 11:53, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

by what criteria it is it not suitable free equivalent? the origrnal is not even copyrighted! --Rancalred (talk) 20:15, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The derivative you've uploaded is likely to fail to convey the meaning intended, would tarnish or misrepresent its image, and would fail its purpose of identification or commentary. I doubt the NTC would create their seal using Microsoft Paint! --

Marianian^(talk) 17:37, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

well if you dont think think this image isn't professinoal enogh you could edit it with more Adavacend software id do it but i would have to Write and use a android app Which i would have to propose a policy to use a special image formatllRancalred (talk) 23:20, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bitstrips

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Bitstrips, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://maestrilloramos.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?orderby=updated.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 10:15, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Bitstrips

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 Bitstrips 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 an organization or company, but it does not 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Sparthorse (talk) 10:21, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maome.jpg

The file you are talking about is not hosted on the English Wikipedia but it is hosted on the Wikimedia Commons. So therefore we do not have a talk page hosted on the English Wikipedia, particularly one that was last created in 2007. If you are going to complain about the depiction of the Muhammad in that ancient piece of artwork then it is perhaps best it is kept deleted.—Ryulong (琉竜) 00:00, 16 September 2012 (UTC) I am not complaing about anything here and it says there that it is hosted on wikimedia coomons since the file is the same keeping the talk page on The engilsh wikipedia seems resonable in fact Not Do so Seem Biased Rancalred (talk) 12:22, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Computer's That Resemble The First-Genration iMac, makes articles harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. It would be appreciated if you could please pay a little more attention to your punctuation. Thanks. -- Trevj (talk) 10:47, 26 September 2012 (UTC) You Can't Delete a article because of a manual of style , if it bothers you thatmuch you can fix it yourself Good DayRancalred (talk) 19:10, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, Freedom Of Expression

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.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Freedom Of Expression. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Freedom of The Press. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Freedom of The Press – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. — further, Francophonie&Androphilie sayeth naught (Je vous invite à me parler) 18:01, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please see AN about your disruptive page moves

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Cirt (talk) 18:04, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

November 2012

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for your apparent inability to understand how Wikipedia works. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:32, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

At a bare minimum before considering unblocking I would want to see an ironclad commitment to not creating new pages and not moving pages without a clear consensus to do so, as these are the areas where you seem to have the most problems. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, How Doe's Wikipedia Work ? Seriously i've read Many, Many Pages in the Wikipedia Namespace And I Think I'm Missing Something Here And I Would Like An Thorough Explanation and an unblock , please Rancalred (talk) 18:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive me for asking this, but is English not your native language? If you are more fluent in some other language it is likely you would get along better at that languages Wikipedia. If you cannot see what might be wrong with creations like this or the various page moves you have made recently then you need to stop doing such things until you do understand. Have you ever considered getting a mentor? Beeblebrox (talk) 19:22, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No , english is my native language And I don't think that would help , are you sure nothing like this has ever happened before? in the history of the English language Wikipedia? i don't edit very often , and i would like to figure out what is going on here. Rancalred (talk) 21:57, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I only asked because of the excess capitalization in some of your edits, that is often indicative of a person less familiar with the rules of the English language. In fact, not to put too fine a point on it, but I presume you were instructed in how to read and write at some point, yet you sometimes seem to have no idea which words should be capitalized and which should not. Whatever issue is causing that lack of understanding may be the same issue that is causing you to misunderstand how to properly write a Wikipedia article and other facets of editing here.

To answer your question, yes, this happened before, many times. Sometimes users come along who only want to help but seem unable to do so. It's not outside the realm of possibility that you could, with some help, learn to contribute in a more constructive fashion. That is why I suggested mentoring. If you are not interested in that I'm not sure what can be done to overcome these issues. You are of course free to post an unblock request as detailed in the block notice if you want another administrator to review this situation. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:23, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I Started Capitalizing Words like this Because Before that I didn't Capitalize anything at all And This Generally is Less Irritating to whomever is reading my typed text, I don't see how That Would be Useful In regards to this situation My Point is, I would like to know what about The things i attempt to add and improve causes them to be reverted And/or deleted. Rancalred (talk) 00:00, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If it was limited to one problem and you were able to easily deal with it yourself there would have been no need to block you in the first place. It seems to be more a general failure of understanding. I would like to ask that you provide yes-or-no answers to the following questions:

Are you willing to agree to stop creating new pages or moving existing pages?
Are you interested in finding a mentor to help you?
Thanks in advance for your replies. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:09, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I Thought about mentoring a while back, but it seems to me that it Serves to create Standardized political viewpoints e.g There are No Social workers Who are Right to die Advocates. Also there isn't any thing else to except make minor edits and Wikipedia:PROD and Wikipedia:AfD articles Bots Can Do The First And Merging An or Moving Articles Seems More Productive. Rancalred (talk) 13:21, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All I can say at this point is that at this time I do not think unblocking you is the correct course of action. Again, you may use the unblock request process as detailed in the original block notice if you wish to have this block reviewed by another admin. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:13, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i would like to figure out what I'm doing wrong so i can stop doing it. Rancalred (talk) 00:04, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your replies here are actually an example of what it is you are doing wrong. You are demonstrating that, for whatever reason, you seem unwilling or unable to learn from past mistakes and improve the quality of your contributions. The article you created that was speedy deleted sixteen months ago exhibits the same issues as the article you created that was speedy deleted just a few days ago. As I have endeavored to explain to you several times now it is not a matter of just telling you one particular rule or policy you are not following, but rather an issue of your general level of comprehension of what this website is and how the English language works. This is why I have repeatedly suggested a mentor. But I'm afraid at this point my feeling is that you should just find something else to do.

When I mentioned your problems with capitalization you defended your lack of any consistency instead of indicating you would try to correct the problem. You also seem to think that accepting mentorship and letting a more experienced user try to help you is some sort of brainwashing program. It appears from these reactions that you have difficulty recognizing when you are in the wrong and admitting you need help. That is your own problem, Wikipedia is not therapy.

I opened the door for you to return and you stubbornly refused to just walk through it. I couldn't even get you to give me a straight answer to yes or no questions even when I specifically asked you to please give me such answers. I don't think your abilities or your attitude are suited for this environment. Again, if you would like a different admin to review this block please use the unblock template. Don't expect any more replies from me as I see no point anymore. Best of luck in your future endeavors. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:40, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i am quite confused Here . I do Believe That i Do Learn From My Mistake's i Just Don't Find Things in Need of editing Terribly Often . The Way You Replied To My Stance on Mentoring Seems To Say That You Think All Social worker's Are Brainwashed This Is Not Intuitive for me And I Would Like To Know If YoU To Know if i am Not Following The "Hidden rules" of editing Wikipedia and, if so what those Rules Are. I will Read your link Now. Rancalred (talk) 13:28, 11 November 2012 (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).

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

Request reason:

No one has Responded to My Post , I Would Like To Learn How To Properly Edit, Freedom of the press is now a thriving article If , I can Just Skip The Part Where I make a Non-productive Edits Wikipedia will benefit Rancalred (talk) 20:41, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Given that:

you are unwilling to communicate in standard English in spite of knowing how to do so;
you failed to acknowledge that the pages you created were not appropriate and give no indication that you will cease such activity;
you continue to project your perception of bias onto other editors who have not mentioned any such bias, indicating a failure to assume good faith;
you refused to consider mentorship as a condition for unblocking; and
you believe there are "hidden rules" here beyond the public policies and guidelines that you clearly haven't read or understood,

I am not convinced that unblocking this account will benefit the Wikipedia project. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:02, 13 November 2012 (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 any reviewing admin I strongly suggest you read the conversation above this request before making any decision. Please feel free to contact me with any questions you may have after doing so. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:53, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear, User:Amatulic I Would Like To Refute Your Points One By One First of All, Wikipedia Does Not Require Standard English . Standard English Was Devised For The Sole Purpose of providing a grammatical standard that can be accepted Across All- English Speaking Countries and Regions Not Using It Does Not Make Wikipedia More or less encyclopedic

Secondly, There Is No Way For Me To Tell If An Edit Is Going To Be Rejected Until It Is My Rejected Edit's Do Not Show Common Characteristics That I Have Not Attempted To Correct In Future Edits IF You Are Aware Of Such A characteristic You should inform me Immediately.

In The Third Point, I merely mentioned What User:Beeblebrox's Words Seem to Suggest That is not what my personal opinion is of User:Beeblebrox As Your Words Seem to Suggest

Lastly, I Have Read Many, Many Polices , Essays And Other Works in The Wikipedia:'' Name space And , Unless I'm Missing Some Point Here , Have Understood Them Fully.

I Sincerely Await Your Reply. Rancalred (talk) 21:34, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Any one .. listen ..... ignoring problem's doesn't fix them anybody? --Rancalred (talk) 18:47, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Admins who review unblock requests do not necessarily watch your user talk page afterward. Or maybe they are watching and like me they have come to the conclusion that your attitude and abilities are not compatible with Wikipedia. You are still free to appeal again or to use WP:UTRS. You might want to try reading Wikipedia:GAB first. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:44, 17 November 2012 (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).

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

Request reason:

I have read Wikipedia:GAB 2nd Time Actually And Will Try To Explain My Case Appropriately I Do See that My editing Has Been Disruptive , I Did Not Intend it To Be Such , I Was Surprised About The Reaction To Freedom of the press , I May Try Wikipedia:Userfication Of Articles , Possibly With A template That allows Other Editors to Rate If It Should Be Moved to the main-space . I offer this in accordance to cited reasons for not unblocking me Please discuss it Before Rejecting The Request. Rancalred (talk) 21:38, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Sorry, but this is an English language site, and you're unwilling or unable to interact in standard English here. Max Semenik (talk) 22:10, 17 November 2012 (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.

I Do Not see How Typing in a Michigan Regional Accent causes an inability to Properly edit Wikipedia . Please use sound reasoning when stating your actions Rancalred (talk) 22:20, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Second chance

This request for unblocking 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.
Click the Edit tab at the top of that article and scroll down past the message informing you of your block.
Copy the source of that article and paste it to the bottom of your talk page under a new top-level heading (like this: = [[Article title]] =) and save the page before you improve it.
Propose some significant and well researched improvements to your article by editing your personal copy 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 "{{helpme|your question here}}" to your talk page. Thank you. —Darkwind (talk) 19:25, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]