Jump to content

User talk:TheCorn(7)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

[edit]

Hello, TheCorn(7), 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 Draft:Dickipedia (Think Tank), may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at the our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

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 ask me on my talk page or you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Belwine (talk) 21:25, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Dickipedia (Think Tank)

[edit]

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, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Draft:Dickipedia (Think Tank), was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Belwine (talk) 21:25, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sleeping Partner (Horse) (March 9)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CommanderWaterford was:
This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:51, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, TheCorn(7)! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:51, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Sleeping Partner (Horse)

[edit]

Information icon Hello, TheCorn(7). This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Sleeping Partner (Horse), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:03, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Sleeping Partner (Horse)

[edit]

Hello, TheCorn(7). It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Sleeping Partner".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Celestina007 (talk) 21:32, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 2021

[edit]
Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism.
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 ~~~~}}.  Jauerbackdude?/dude. 19:52, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unban

[edit]
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).

TheCorn(7) (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Decline reason:

I don't believe that, but in any event you don't describe the constructive contributions you want to make, so I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 18:22, 24 September 2021 (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.

No but can you actually please unban me

[edit]
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).

TheCorn(7) (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I actually like to contribute on Wikipedia TheCorn(7) (talk) 19:41, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You are working hard to demonstrate you should remain blocked. Yamla (talk) 20:35, 30 September 2021 (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.

What do you mean?

[edit]
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).

TheCorn(7) (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I don't know why everyone thinks I should stay blocked, I've created legitimate articles. Sleeping Partner was an actual racehorse foaled in 1966, but it got removed for some reason. The same with Dickipedia, that was also a legitimate English talk show.TheCorn(7) (talk) 14:56, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Nothing but vandalism from this account. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 14:59, 1 October 2021 (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.

Please?

[edit]
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).

TheCorn(7) (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please just unban me, I have nothing else to say. This is an example of what I want to contribute. All has been paraphrased and is original with valid sources. “The Vietnam War in America.” Vietnam: There and Here, by Margot C.J. Mabie, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1985, pp. 91–115. • It was almost as if Vietnam was a war with three sides: The VC, then Americans who supported the stand against communism, and those who were against American involvement (91) o Those in support of the war were referred to as Hawks, while those against were called doves • The Hawks justified American intervention in Vietnam, by pointing to communist suppression (93) o In essence it was their fear of communism spreading that fueled the start of the war • Hawks feared what was popularly called at the time “The domino theory,” which dictated as one country falls to communist control, the next is close to follow (94) • The Doves viewed Vietnam as a continuation of a longer revolution started in 1941 when Ho Chi Minh moved to force the colonial powers of France and Japan with the help of the Vietminh (97) • The Vietminh was the first communist independence coalition in Vietnam, which was formed with the aim to liberate Vietnam, and facilitate a communist transition (97) • The early 1950s meant war between the French who were unwilling to give up their holdings, and the Vietminh who were fixed on independence (98) • The United States entered the picture in 1956 in support of South Vietnam President Ngo Dihn Diem’s decision to cancel presidential elections, in a continued effort to prevent unification (98) • American support for South Vietnam as an independent state continued until 1975 when the last diplomats fled (98) o Their financial aid, military support to the ARVN, and service as diplomatic advisors allowed the independent existence South Vietnam for nearly 20 years • Many Doves believed that the war was unwinnable, as a result of American failure to their ally, South Vietnam (99) • Some American’s, who were against the war, claimed that the fight against world communism was futile. Despite both our economic and militaristic strength, it is impossible to crush communism in every country where it appears (99) • It was America’s involvement in Vietnam which prevented the Sino-Soviet split, beginning in the early 50’s, from fully coming to conclusion (100) • It was the attempted coup on behalf of the South Vietnamese army in 1960 which brought the first wave of American journalists and reporters to the South-Asian warzone (103) • Diem was considerably dissatisfied with American reports and criticism in Vietnam. His primary concern was that if criticism reached the United States, American aid would cease (104) • Their response was to accuse any and all journalists of being communists, and revoke their visas to report in Vietnam (104) • American officials were also concerned about the media, as they did not wish for news regarding the real role of American Military “Advisers” to reach the American public, as it might have caused concern (104) • “A communiqué should say nothing, in such a way as to fool the press without deceiving them.” – McGeorge Bundy (104) o National security advisor to Presidents Kennedy and Johnson • “Part of the reason for this, I think, was because of the particular way in which the Time’s executives view the magazine: to a large degree they see it not just as a magazine of reporting, but as an instrument of policy making. Thus, what Time’s editors want to happen is as important as what is happening.” – David Halberstam (105) o Writer David Halberstam commented on Time magazine’s failure to divulge much of the truth from what really was happening in Vietnam • Halberstam was one of the few correspondents able to get their writings published, and upon the realization that neither government had prevented the more sinister reports from reaching the United States, a formal complaint from President Kennedy himself to have Halberstam reassigned was rejected. (106) • American concern began to grow starting in1965 as the first combat troops, 3,500 marines, landed in South Vietnam (110) • The US had entered the war as merely advisors, but 9 months later saw over 200,000 US troops on the ground, with considerably greater involvement in the actual fighting (110) • As the “draft” reared its head, more and more conscientious objectors tried different ways to avoid service. However, as the war developed, young men who had been previously exempt while in university, were no longer protected by 1968. (111) • “Draft dodgers” were young men who went about any way possible to avoid military service (111) o Employment in a company that supported the war effort; being a father; fleeing the United States; intentionally failing the physical exam • “Did we realize that the draft machine was tottering towards its ultimate breakdown? … That each body we withheld from its ravenous appetite brought with it that much nearer the end?” – Michael Ferber (112) o Antiwar activist • 26.8 million American men were of age between 1964 and 1973. Of those only 11 million served in the military, and 3 million in Vietnam. (112) • “Because the upper class didn’t send kids to war, they didn’t oppose it in something other than a bloodless way …. The more the burden of the war was shifted on families who had the least influence, the longer the war went on.” – James Fallows (112) • Thus, the peace movement began large amounts of mostly young people began protests, marches, antiwar speeches, and even at the most extreme, self-immolations (114) o 1965 marked the gruesome self-immolation of two young people. One in front of the Pentagon, and one in front of the United Nations a few days later. • “Because protest was associated with drugs and long hair and the counterculture of the decade, it may have slowed rather than stimulated general dissent.” – Barbara Tuchman (114) • As protests and general dissent grew, Americans who had previously supported the war began to change face, but for vastly different reasons. Many believed that American involvement wasn’t aggressive enough, some even advocating for the use of Nuclear weapons against North Vietnam (115) • Others turned against the war because it simply cost too much, both emotionally and fiscally. By 1967, federal deficit had reached $9.8 billion. (115) TheCorn(7) (talk) 15:02, 1 October 2021 (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. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

  • the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
  • the block is no longer necessary because you
    1. understand what you have been blocked for,
    2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
    3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 11:12, 24 October 2021 (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.

Where and how would you contribute this? Daniel Case (talk) 02:28, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Users are not permitted to remove declined unblock requests, please do not remove them again. Lavalizard101 (talk) 16:19, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please just unban me, its all I ask

Please just unban me

[edit]
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).

TheCorn(7) (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I just want to be unbanned TheCorn(7) (talk) 20:19, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

There is already an open request above. SQLQuery Me! 19:12, 10 October 2021 (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.

Come on, I've been banned long enough

[edit]
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).

TheCorn(7) (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Come on, there has to be someone who will just unban me TheCorn(7) (talk) 14:32, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your best chance of being unblocked is to take the standard offer and re-apply for an unblock in 6 months time with no socking. PhilKnight (talk) 16:09, 25 October 2021 (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.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TheCorn(7)&oldid=1051788347"