| Revision as of 20:21, 30 December 2007 editGabrielVelasquez (talk | contribs)2,704 edits →What are you doing?← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 20:42, 3 September 2021 edit undoPrimeBOT (talk | contribs)Bots2,048,605 editsm →October 2010: Task 24: removal of a template following a TFDTag: AWB | ||
| (385 intermediate revisions by 72 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| == October 2010 == | |||
| ==Editing policy== | |||
| <div class="user-block"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''2 weeks''' for ''']''', as you did in . Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. If you would like to be unblocked, you may ] by adding below this notice the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx" argument. -->{{tlx|unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the ] first. ] <small>(])</small> 01:58, 3 October 2010 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:uw-block --><!-- Template:uw-hblock --> | |||
| http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Editing_policy<br /> | |||
| I have just read the editing policy and feel encouraged that I am on the right track.<br /> | |||
| '''"Improve"'''<br /> | |||
| -] (]) 01:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :You do not have to link to the entire URL if the link is from Misplaced Pages. Entering <nowiki>]</nowiki>in the code will link to this: ] too. | |||
| {{unblock reviewed|1=Malformed block template, <br /> no real info on reason for block, <br /> looks very fishy to me. <br /> GIVE A REAL REASON. <br /> What is this for and where is the proof?<br /> I don't have a real opportunity to request to be unblocked <br /> because requesting information on this will probably count<br /> as my only allowed request to be unblocked <br /> And I am sure that was done deliberately<br /> So being malformed I ask that it be dismissed.<br /> Also, what ever this is about, two weeks is ridiculously harsh.<br /> Where the improvements made recently considered? |decline=Far too many personal attacks to consider unblocking at this time. ] (]) 02:23, 3 October 2010 (UTC)}} | |||
| ==Welcome== | |||
| {{#if:{{{border|}}}|__TOC__|}} | |||
| {{#if:{{{border|}}}|<div style="background:white; border:2px {{{border|Blue}}} solid; padding:12px;">|}} | |||
| {{#ifeq:{{{heading|}}}|true|==|'''}}{{{headtext|Welcome...}}}{{#ifeq:{{{heading|}}}|true|==|'''}} | |||
| {{#switch:{{{cookies}}}|true=]|}} | |||
| <p>Hello, GabrielVelasquez, and ] Thank you for ]. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. {{#switch:{{{npov}}}|true=Unfortunately, one or more of your edits {{#if:{{{article|}}}|to the page ]|}} have not conformed to ''']''', and have been reverted. Misplaced Pages articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.There's a page about the ] that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole.</p><p>|}} Here are some {{#if:{{{npov|}}}|other||}} pages that you might find helpful:</p> | |||
| {{#switch:{{{icons}}}|true=:] '''|*}}]{{#if:{{{icons|}}}|'''|}} | |||
| {{#switch:{{{icons}}}|true=:] '''|*}}]{{#if:{{{icons|}}}|'''|}} | |||
| {{#switch:{{{icons}}}|true=:] '''|*}}]{{#if:{{{icons|}}}|'''|}} | |||
| {{#switch:{{{icons}}}|true=:] '''|*}}]{{#if:{{{icons|}}}|'''|}} | |||
| {{#switch:{{{icons}}}|true=:] '''|*}}]{{#if:{{{icons|}}}|'''|}} | |||
| {{#switch:{{{icons}}}|true=:] '''|*}}]{{#if:{{{icons|}}}|'''|}} | |||
| {{#switch:{{{anon|}}}|true=<p>I would recommend that you get a username by clicking '''<span class="plainlinksneverexpand"></span>'''. You don't have to ] to read or edit articles on Misplaced Pages, but creating an account is quick, free and non-intrusive, requires no personal information, and has many ]. As a registered user, you gain the use of an ] ] of your choice, a personal ] to which you can add articles that interest you, the ability to ], and much more. Also, your ], GabrielVelasquez, will no longer be visible to other users.</p>|}} | |||
| <p>Please ] on talk pages using four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on my talk page, or place <code><nowiki>{{helpme}}</nowiki></code> on your talk page and ask your question there.{{#if:{{{1|}}}|</p><p>{{{1}}}</p><p>| }}{{#if:{{{nosig|}}}||Again, welcome! ]<sup> (]) (])</sup> 02:28, 30 December 2007 (UTC)}}</p>{{#if:{{{border|}}}|</div>|}} | |||
| == |
== Bit late but == | ||
| Here is a link to learn how to work with photos. ] If you need more help feel free to notify me. ]<sup> (]) (])</sup> 03:21, 30 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
| This is a bit late but it is completely unacceptable to add back personal attacks and threats of this sort . It could easily lead to a block if you weren't already blocked. In some circumstances, it may be acceptable to mention a comment was removed but in that case, the comment was completely worthless and inappropriate so there was no need. ] (]) 02:18, 3 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == What are you doing? == | |||
| <div class="user-block"> ] You have been ''']''' '''indefinitely''' from editing for prolific sockpuppetry compounded with severe, prolonged ] per discussion on ANI. If you would like to be unblocked, you may ] by adding below this notice the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx" argument. -->{{tlx|unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the ] first. ] <small>(])</small> 02:43, 3 October 2010 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:uw-block --><!-- Template:uw-blockindef --> | |||
| Please stop messing with the sections at ]. ] ] 04:46, 30 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Are you insane? I was obvious what was being done. You even deleted the complete explanation of what was going on and the consensus to get away with what you did. There was nothing deleted. There is a horrible amound of redundant talk distributed all over. This was only a sort. I will spend another full day if I have to to restructure the 57+ plus entries into something more coherent and less contractictory and redundant. Nothing has been or will be deleted, I was in the middle of this and it took me all day and I was almost done. You have no idea. I swear. ] (]) 04:54, 30 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::A dissuasion page is generally not reared to be easy to read. ]<sup> (]) (])</sup> 14:00, 30 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :: "Generally," what are you implying. I don't see the issue. Are you saying it's okay for it to be difficult to read a discussion page, and okay for it to be ridiculously redundant and convoluted, even when someone can do something about it, even when the structure is right there in the article (content menu) itself . I can appreciate the free expression and artistic processes, but there is a limit to how much chaos I can stand for ("Improve"). I does no harm that I can think of (can you?) and it will only benefit the discussion in the long run. It should have been done long before me. - 20:21, 30 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Reminder == | |||
| Just a friendly reminder about ] and ]. :) - ] (]) 04:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Astronomical formulae== | |||
| If I were you, I would use sourced values whenever possible. Very simple calculations such as orbital periods based on semimajor axes in the Solar System should be OK. If you're going to rearrange astronomical formulae, you should know exactly what you're doing. | |||
| I have no doubt that ]'s contributions are honest, but he is clearly lacking the knowledge needed (I confess, I too have been guilty for that sometimes myself...). The calculations he has done have been either pure speculation or just nonsensical. Worse, he kept readding them. Good-willing, but clueless editors are one reason why haven't been as active as before. I'm sad to hear that Dr. Submillimeter has gone, but it is also very worrying that he's just one in a long list of professional contributors who have got enough.--— ] <sup style="font-size:x-small">]</sup> 14:29, 30 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 20:42, 3 September 2021
October 2010
{{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Toddst1 (talk) 01:58, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
GabrielVelasquez (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Malformed block template,
no real info on reason for block,
looks very fishy to me.
GIVE A REAL REASON.
What is this for and where is the proof?
I don't have a real opportunity to request to be unblocked
because requesting information on this will probably count
as my only allowed request to be unblocked
And I am sure that was done deliberately
So being malformed I ask that it be dismissed.
Also, what ever this is about, two weeks is ridiculously harsh.
Where the improvements made recently considered?
Decline reason:
Far too many personal attacks to consider unblocking at this time. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 02:23, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
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.
Bit late but
This is a bit late but it is completely unacceptable to add back personal attacks and threats of this sort . It could easily lead to a block if you weren't already blocked. In some circumstances, it may be acceptable to mention a comment was removed but in that case, the comment was completely worthless and inappropriate so there was no need. Nil Einne (talk) 02:18, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
{{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Toddst1 (talk) 02:43, 3 October 2010 (UTC)