User talk:Tim96144

Archives

Hi Tim

Hi Tim96144, a user recently massively removed sourced content on the Chris Brown article, and many others related to him, can you please check these removals? He claims that he removed "largely unsubstantiated claims by poor sources or basic fancruft", but in reality these claims are false. He removed every update from the page, wikilinks, and lots of sourced things that shouldn't have been removed. He brought back the article to a 2019's version of that page. It seems to be heavy vandalism to me. Additionally, removing updated versions of articles like F.A.M.E. (Chris Brown album) and X (Chris Brown album), he even removed the update of RIAA certifictions for those albums--146.241.151.9 (talk) 07:13, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stop marking removals/additions of content as minor edits

I suggest you stop marking significant removals of content like this as minor. Same with additions like this and this. If you're adding a whole new wikitable, that is not minor. You really should know better by this point. If you don't, see Help:Minor edit for what constitutes a minor edit. Ss112 09:51, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty sure I previously asked you to not get in my way of charts I'm actively adding and you agreed. You did exactly that just now. Leave it alone. Ss112 11:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it does. See WP:HOUNDING. Following somebody's edits and editing articles after them for no good reason (i.e. when they're doing nothing wrong) is hounding. "Hounding usually involves following the target from place to place on Wikipedia." That's exactly what you are doing. You have precedent for being a block-evading, harassing plagiariser here. It's understandable you'd be followed by other editors, but you have no reason for following me from article to article on Wikipedia. Ss112 02:22, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is this really so important to you?

Is the Dutch Top 100 chart peak of "Follow Me" so important to you that you feel compelled to stay up for hours past the last edit you made in order to make sure it's updated? Couldn't you have done it when you came online later? What gives, do you wake up in the middle of a night in a cold sweat thinking about chart positions? Your editing habits are incredibly odd and I think you need to stop being so fixated on charts on Wikipedia. I thought I cared about charts, but you take it to a whole other obsessive level. Ss112 17:19, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: Because you sometimes forgot to update singles chart, you sometimes just updated artists discography's pages, but forgot to update the song/single's page, that's why I must stare at you. Tim96144 (talk) 04:13, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: Your mean is: next time if I find you forget updating peaks again, I can't also help you update those, a question: who will deal with those? If it can reach a consensus, I will not be a hounding.

Hounding has nothing to do with a consensus. I don't know why you're talking about reaching a consensus. Me telling you to stop hounding me is not something you can negotiate your way out of. You do not have an obligation to stalk somebody's edits to monitor whether or not they've forgotten to update a chart position. Editing is not a job. Life will not end because you or I or somebody forgot to update a chart position. Nothing bad will happen. Stop treating editing Wikipedia like it's something you have to do. Ss112 05:08, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: Understand. Tim96144 (talk) 05:10, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly you don't understand, Tim. Again, just today, hours after saying you "understand", you followed me two articles, [1] and [2]. It is not coincidence in any way that you edited those articles in the same day, considering you've never edited either of them. Enough is enough. Stop following me around Wikipedia. This is your absolute last warning. Next time I promise you I am informing an administrator of your continued hounding. Leave me alone and stop following me to articles you have never edited. You are a serial pest and your destiny is truly becoming to be blocked on this website. Don't think I won't notice you editing articles hours after me tomorrow, the day after, the week after. Stop and go away. Ss112 15:32, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You know what? Let's inform an admin right now. @Sergecross73: Along with all the other issues Tim has caused (block evasion, plagiarism, harassing me on my talk page while logged out), he's now hounding me. I have no other word for it. It is straight-up pestering and using my contributions as some sort of guide on what to edit. He claimed above that he would stop and acknowledged it is annoying to me, yet this is about the fourth time I've come here to ask Tim to stop so excuse my...impolite tone. I've explained to Tim why there are editors besides myself who look at what he does (the plagiarism, still creating articles after you advised him to stop, fixing up his poor grammar) but he has no reason for doing it vice versa. Do you think this is worth a warning for him to stop? I've gone through this with other editors, but Tim claims he understands and then continues to do it anyway. I'm going to be blunt, but I just don't see how Tim is ever going to evolve beyond a continued timesink with the amount of issues he has caused and continues to cause. He clearly does not understand simple requests. Ss112 15:37, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While I can't ask anyone to stop adding properly sourced chart positions, yes, it would probably be in the best interest of everyone involved if you two kept interactions to a minimum. Tim, it is not anyone's responsibility to edit anything on Wikipedia - we're all volunteers here and no one is obligated to do anything other than generally follow the rules. Sergecross73 msg me 16:27, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tim, you were told by @Sergecross73: to avoid interacting with me. That includes updating pages I forgot to update two minutes after I updated a related article. You can ignore these messages if you like but I know you see them. Get the message and leave me alone. Get a hobby off of Wikipedia, this doesn't seem healthy for you. Ss112 04:29, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Add cover art please?

Hi, @Tim96144:! Hope you are doing well. I have a small favor to ask you. Would you mind adding the cover art for the article Hands Up (Merk & Kremont song)? You can use this link to get the cover art: https://music.apple.com/us/album/hands-up-feat-dnce-single/1364954519. Thank you and have a good day/night! 172.58.110.216 (talk) 19:13, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, @Tim96144:. Would you mind adding the cover art to this article: Attention (Omah Lay and Justin Bieber song)? You can get it here: https://music.apple.com/us/album/attention-single/1610192492. Thank you.

Hello, @Tim96144:. Sorry to bother you, but this is the last one for today. Can you add the cover art to this article: People to People? Here is the link for it: https://music.apple.com/us/album/people-to-people-ep/1396076197. Thanks and have a good spring break.

March 2022

Another reminder that it's not okay to create articles that are mostly direct quotes. If you can't write in your own words, you shouldn't be writing/creating articles. This is the last reminder you'll get on this, as we've talked about this before. Sergecross73 msg me 00:06, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Scratch that, I remembered wrong. I havent just warned you about this, Ive blocked you for this twice, and I said the next time I catch you do it, I'd indefinitely block you. So instead, you're blocked indefinitely. I told you many times to read WP:QUOTEFARM and WP:PARAPHRASE, and to use WP:AFC until you fully understood. And yet again you've violated this. You're not ready to be editing Wikipedia it seems. Sergecross73 msg me 00:14, 8 March 2022 (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).

Tim96144 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please unblock my account, I won't live without Wikipedia

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. 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. Daniel Case (talk) 05:53, 8 March 2022 (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 won't live without Wikipedia"... Tim, that sounds like a very unhealthy obsession. There's a whole world outside of Wikipedia and furthermore the Internet. If you really "can't live without Wikipedia", well, your first language is Mandarin, right? Why don't you learn the ropes on the Mandarin Wikipedia and contribute to its coverage of Western pop and country music as you have been doing here? And as it's your first language you wouldn't need to directly quote as much because you can paraphrase better. Anyway, just a suggestion. Ss112 06:55, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sad to see you blocked

I for one am sad to see you blocked. I think many articles have benefited from your edits adding properly sourced charts. You became one of those editors that I can ignore on my watchlist, knowing their edits are solid. I am not saying the block is unjustified as these are serious concerns and you repeatedly ignored warnings and a previous block. I am also acknowledging that there is something unhealthy with being so obsessed about any subject. Just know that some of your work was appreciated by some editors. Consider Ss112's suggestion above, and I hope you can find a way to return and contribute where your edits are beneficial. --Muhandes (talk) 09:13, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: Don't be sad, I think I don't have enough experience to be a qualified editor. Everything that @Ss112: and @Sergecross73: said make sense, I need to leave Wikipedia for a while to find more and more wonderful world. Tim96144 (talk) 09:32, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy you see it this way. I'm sure a wikibreak will do you good. --Muhandes (talk) 10:03, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: It might not matter much to you, but don't believe a word Tim says; two hours after he replied to you above, he re-registered with User:Nogi4646. He had no plans to leave. I think it would do him good to get his life together off of a computer. Ss112 07:30, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I realized that. It's always sad when one can no longer assume good faith. --Muhandes (talk) 07:56, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Don't block evade. I will revert any contributions I find from your Taiwanese IPs.

You didn't even try to hide it, editing after Sergecross on Where Did You Go? and adding another peak to Zombified. You are basically the only Taiwanese IP I find making chart updates, so stop trying or I will revert all I find. Find a life outside of Wikipedia or stick to the Mandarin Wikipedia like I suggested. It would do you a world of good. Ss112 14:43, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Block evasion

To Tim - You've already been told before, but a reminder - block evasion is not allowed. You, as a person, are not allowed to edit the English Wikipedia. Any time you are caught, your edits will be removed on sight.
To any admin who may review unblock requests in the future - let it be known that Tim has already been caught block evading. Sergecross73 msg me 17:16, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tim96144. 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 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 ~~~~}}. Girth Summit _(blether) 10:00, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request

@Sergecross73 and Ss112: Don't I any chances to return English Wikipedia?? Can't I use any unblock requests to return?? What should I do?? Tim96144 (talk) 06:18, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can't keep block evading and then have any hope for an unblock request to work. You still haven't stopped block evading. No admin would ever unblock someone still actively and frequently block evading. See WP:STANDARDOFFER. What you need to do is take some serious time away from the website, and then come up with a real well-thought out unblock request. Sergecross73 msg me 10:50, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73: According to WP:STANDARDOFFER, At least six months, without sockpuppetry or block evasion. The mean is: If I wasn't found sockpuppetry or block evasion for half a year, I still have a chance to request unblock?? Tim96144 (talk) 14:23, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Correct. Every time you evade your block, it resets that clock to six months again. You need to not edit Wikipedia for at least six months to even hope to have any chance at all to be unblocked. Sergecross73 msg me 14:33, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73: Sorry to bother you, can I request my block early? Or continue to wait for four months? Tim96144 (talk) 04:58, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No Admin is going to look at your history of socking and COPYVIO issues and decide to unblock you early. But now is the time to start working on understanding a good WP:UNBLOCK request is, and work on explaining what's changed, how you've learned from your mistakes and won't make them again. So you're fully ready when it hits the six month mark. Sergecross73 msg me 13:00, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you waste my time asking me that if you were just going ignore my answer and ask to be unblocked anyways? This only furthers my belief that you're not ready to be editing Wikipedia. Sergecross73 msg me 16:35, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Ignite K-391.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ignite K-391.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:18, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request

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).

Tim96144 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have leave Wikipedia for two months. in the past, I always violated Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry, Wikipedia:Copyright violations, I know those bad things will cause damage my reputation on Wikipedia. After leaving for two months, I found other pleasures, at the same time also found new job, after knowing it's more important things than Wikipedia, I didn't more addict to Wikipedia than before, because Wikipedia just a little little parts of my Internet life. If my account can unblock, I will edit simple part of articles, or like the same as in the past, add or update these lists which was forgotten, obey WP:POL. As for creating a new article, I will respect WP:COPY, if it is found this or WP:SOCK by Administrators, I will quit Wikipedia forever. For me, this passage is ultimatum.

Decline reason:

Much too soon. You were caught further evading your block in April. Your best bet is to go at least six months with zero edits, then apply under WP:SO. Yamla (talk) 14:41, 21 June 2022 (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.

Request again

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).

Tim96144 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was block by multiple administrator for six months, due not to complied with Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry, Wikipedia:Copyright violations. I have learned a lesson, after unlock, I will obey any specification on Wikipedia from scratch, if I violation copyright warning or sockpuppets again, I will quit Wikipedia forever. I hope everyone can give me a last chance to edit Wikipedia. ~ to administrators

Decline reason:

A simple reassurance is not sufficient for copyright violation blocks. Please answer the questions at User:Yunshui/decline copyvio in your next appeal. MER-C 18:22, 21 October 2022 (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 evidence of recent block evasion, based on checkuser data. --Yamla (talk) 10:20, 18 October 2022 (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).

Tim96144 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Copyright is the exclusive right of the copyright owner to his work. About the Wikipedia licenced, it is co-licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License. Because Wikipedia's database servers located at the United States, so Wikipedia is constraint by US copyright law, need to obey. If the content is use for criticism, parody, news reporting, research and scholarship, and teaching, the copyrighted content is available to use. For avoid getting the copyrighted warning, obtain the consent of the original author before citing the sources, if I without the consent of others, don't copy, quote and share, finally if I make mistakes about Wikipedia:Copyright violations, I will take all responsibility.

Decline reason:

That started off well but went downhill. Your description of when we can use non free content is overly broad. While your description of getting permission prior to citing is just plain wrong. PhilKnight (talk) 16:19, 22 October 2022 (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.

Free My Man Tim

Unban him, this tomfoolery is wholly unjustified and the neckbeards responsible should be punished by death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.129.200.40 (talk) 09:07, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

nevermind his first language is mandarin lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.129.200.40 (talk) 09:09, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request

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).

Tim96144 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

What is copyright? A: According to copyright.gov, copyright is a type of intellectual property that protects original works of authorship as soon as an author fixes the work in a tangible form of expression. How is Wikipedia licenced? A: A license is a permission to use a work in the way described by the license. Wikipedia content is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Agreement (CC BY-SA 3.0) and the GNU Free Archive License (GFDL). It means that the encyclopedia will always be free, and that anyone can use it. Why is copyrighted content not allowed on Wikipedia? A: Because the database servers are located in the United States, Wikipedia is subject to US copyright law in this matter and may not host material which infringes US copyright law. According to US copyright law, the primary things to consider when asking if something is fair use: 1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; 2. The nature of the copyrighted work; 3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and 4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. Under what circumstances can we use copyrighted content? A: If I want to use it, must contact the owner of the copyright of the text or illustration in question If I wish to reuse content from Wikipedia, first read the Reusers' rights and obligations section. How do you intend to avoid violating the copyright policy in the future? A: 1.Organize this knowledge or synthesize various sources, and write them down in your own words. Then indicate the source of the source as an external link at the end of the article, or use the wiki's footnote feature. 2. Ask the original author and request to waive the copyright or part of the copyright of this work (including but not limited to CC-BY, CC-BY-SA and other licenses allowed by Wikipedia), so as to allow others (including Wikipedia) to modify, Build new versions etc. The version used by Wikipedia, and later developed versions, will be released in free form under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license. 3. Use material that does not itself have a copyright claim. Generally, the homepage of the website will publish a copyright statement, so you must check the relevant requirements. If it is stated that the content is free (modification and commercial use must be allowed), or the content of the public domain, it can be reproduced arbitrarily. And it should be noted that simply writing "reprinting allowed" or "reprinting please indicate the source" is not a valid free license agreement; the website must clearly declare that the content is in the public domain or released under an agreement permitted by Wikipedia.

Decline reason:

The checkuser part of this block is (currently) clear. That's good. However, your answers are not generally correct. You appear to have missed all of WP:FAIRUSE when answering, "Under what circumstances can we use copyrighted content?" (though I admit, your answer is unclear and may be attempting to reference this). Additionally, the following answer is incorrect: "If it is stated that the content is free (modification and commercial use must be allowed), or the content of the public domain, it can be reproduced arbitrarily". Such content generally cannot be reproduced arbitrarily. Much free content requires attribution, for example. Yamla (talk) 11:43, 16 January 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.

@Sergecross73: I have been waiting for 1 month......

Pings do not work unless you also sign the post in which you ping with four tildes(~~~~). Only a checkuser can authorize the removal of this block. Checkusers are limited in number and are volunteers, please be patient(I am not a checkuser). 331dot (talk) 10:22, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Leave a Little Love.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Leave a Little Love.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:17, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Block evasion

A note for future unblock requests - Tim was caught block evading in May 2023. Sergecross73 msg me 13:54, 18 May 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).

Tim96144 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

For six months, answer User:Yunshui/decline copyvio again: What is copyright? According to Wikipedia:Copyrights The text of Wikipedia is copyrighted (automatically, under the Berne Convention) by Wikipedia editors and contributors and is formally licensed to the public under one or several liberal licenses. How is Wikipedia licenced? A license is a permission to use a work in the way described by the license. Wikipedia content is released under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Agreement (CC BY-SA 3.0) and the GNU Free Archive License (GFDL). It means that the encyclopedia will always be free, and that anyone can use it. Why is copyrighted content not allowed on Wikipedia? A: Because the database servers are located in the United States, Wikipedia is subject to US copyright law in this matter and may not host material which infringes US copyright law. According to US copyright law, the primary things to consider when asking if something is fair use: 1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; 2. The nature of the copyrighted work; 3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and 4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Decline reason:

Per below. — Daniel Case (talk) 07:53, 26 November 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.

Tim96144 (talk) 11:18, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Possible block evasion earlier this week. This is a long way from certain, but given the extensive history of sockpuppetry from this user, I'm not at all comfortable with this user being unblocked at this time. --Yamla (talk) 11:37, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]