User talk:Awardmaniac

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --MarchOrDie (talk) 20:58, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:02, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As per Special:Diff/886453975 and Special:Diff/886454446, you are now under an indefinite WP:TOPICBAN on subject areas related to Michael Jackson, broadly construed. That includes related articles and talk pages. You are further placed under a WP:1RR restriction which applies to all other articles. This may be appealed no sooner than 6 months from this date. Appeals are more likely to be successful if you demonstrate a pattern of conflict-free editing in unrelated articles. --Yamla (talk) 11:03, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Awardmaniac: Be careful. Unless I'm getting the timestamps wrong, I think these two edits violated your topic ban.[1][2] They came shortly after your formal notification on your talk page, so I will assume good faith that you hadn't yet read your talk page. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 18:22, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

what does a topic ban mean. What can and cant i do? Awardmaniac (talk) 18:25, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're not allowed to edit any article or talk page related to Michael Jackson, broadly construed. You are also not allowed to revert more than once within a 24-hour period. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 18:28, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Whats "broadly construed"?. Does it mean I cant edit any Michael related article in any way shape or form? For what? I have not done anything wrong since my block ended. Awardmaniac (talk) 18:32, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it means you can't edit any Michael Jackson related article in any shape or form. As for why, I'm not the one who implemented it. I'm just trying to explain what your topic ban means. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 18:38, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Quest For Knowledge is correct. The following three edits unambiguously violated your topic ban: [3] [4] [5]. By all rights, you should have been blocked as soon as you performed the first of these edits, but I'm going to extend good faith to you and assume you didn't realise. Note that you won't get any more warnings. If you have questions about this topic ban and 1RR restriction, please ask before you make any further edits. --Yamla (talk) 19:28, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll also strongly suggest you read what we've linked you to. For example, WP:TOPICBAN explains topic bans. WP:1RR explains your 1RR restriction. --Yamla (talk) 19:31, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So I cant appeal to get unbanned? Awardmaniac (talk) 21:02, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This has already been answered at Special:Diff/886453975. You absolutely can, in six months. As noted at Special:Diff/886454992, that request is more likely to be successful if you demonstrate a pattern of conflict-free editing in unrelated articles. --Yamla (talk) 21:14, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've reported you at ANI here for deliberately going against your topic ban. That's asking for trouble. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:56, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48h for topic ban violation. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.  User:Ymblanter (talk) 07:49, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

---

Request reason:

I want my topic ban removed. I been good for six months now and have been editing with out any problems. I dont see no reason why I still should be topic banned. People learn from there mistakes.

Decline reason:

You are kidding, surely? Almost every edit you've made since March has been in violation. You clearly haven't learnt from your mistakes and I'm really surprised you were only blocked for 48 hours. More commonly, someone who has been so blatant in their violations end up with indefinite blocks, and that's the road you are heading down. Unblock reviewers have no ability to lift your topic ban and you clearly aren't a candidate anyway. What we do have permission to do is to extend your block; I warn you that's the most likely action that will be taken if you continue down this path. Yamla (talk) 11:09, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Note given your violations of the topic ban, you may appeal it no sooner than six months from your block expiry. That would be March 6, 2020, assuming you commit no more topic ban violations. --Yamla (talk) 11:11, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Awardmaniac, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community. Yamla (talk) 12:52, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Awardmaniac. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Bbb23 (talk) 14:18, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User was caught evading their block and attempting to mislead us about it, in October 2019. They used the account to continue violating their topic ban. They are on track to be indefinitely banned from Wikipedia, under WP:3X. --Yamla (talk) 22:37, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Jaafar Jermiah Jackson, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. 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 at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:21, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Awardmaniac. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Jaafar Jermiah Jackson".

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! Bkissin (talk) 19:09, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]