User talk:Shim119
Welcome!
Hello, Shim119, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Super Bowl LIV. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Longhair\talk 11:37, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
File copyright problem with File:New York License Plate.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:New York License Plate.jpg. However, it is currently missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. ✗plicit 12:16, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:New York License Plate.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:New York License Plate.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) 17:43, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
License tagging for File:New York plate 4-2010.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:New York plate 4-2010.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.
To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:30, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Nomination of Paper Tag Nation for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paper Tag Nation until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Black Kite (talk) 19:23, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Your complaint about User:Zzuuzz
Please note that ArbCom probably won't do anything given the request you made. The proper procedure is:
- Talk to Zzuuzz on his or her talk page.
- The next escalation (if he or she doesn't respond within a reasonable amount of time, or if you are unsatisfied at the result of the discussion) is to the administrators' noticeboard.
- Unless you can show either a pattern of wrong decisions on his or her part, or a serious and blatant violation, don't go to ArbCom.
- Both on Zzuuzz's talk page, and on AN, please specify the IP address you're talking about.
Animal lover |666| 19:49, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
- This is OK general advice, but as a checkuser I am sometimes limited in what I can say and what I can link together in public. Many of my actions, especially when it comes to IP addresses or checkuser blocks, are answerable to Arbcom and they are indeed the correct forum for some of my actions including this one (unless you think there's a pattern, or that I'm compromised, etc). However, contacting them privately is really the way to go about it. I sometimes take it for granted that this is known. See Wikipedia:CheckUser#Complaints_and_misuse, and I can tell you this falls well inside Arbcom's remit, and outside of others' remit. If you want to go to AN you're welcome to, but be warned we have a saying about WP:BOOMERANGS, and I still won't be able to discuss some things. Anyone will tell you that discussing a complaint with hidden facts is usually a waste of time. -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:06, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
@Zzuuzz: are you official wikimedia staff or something? I'm not asking you to tell us which ip address belong to which accounts. i'm just asking you to assume good faith with newer users. remember, not everyone is aware of the policies and WP:BITEing them only makes thing worse for you. Shim119 (talk) 20:23, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not staff or anything official. I'm just a volunteer (albeit a highly experienced one with more tools than most). I am answerable to the WP:CHECKUSER and WP:ADMIN policies, among others. I'm hampered here about how much I can say publicly unless you want to divulge some extra details (which I'm not encouraging), so I'll try and keep this vague. Your account is not blocked. No accounts relating to you have been blocked. You have experienced one of the mildest restrictions available, something we regularly ask of institutions such as schools or mobile networks, and it's in response to some serious abuse going on right in your vicinity. You are being asked to log in to edit some of the time. This is evidently not an onerous imposition, and in fact constantly switching between logged-in editing and logged-out editing is quite frowned upon. It's frowned upon to the extent that I can justify weighing the abuse we're receiving against this imposition. And to be clear this is not even a restriction against you logging out to edit using other IP addresses as I know you sometimes do. I've used some of the lightest possible actions, and I think they're justified. You're welcome to the opinions of Arbcom (or other checkusers if you prefer) if you want a measure of whether I'm right. -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:52, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Zzuuzz blocked Shim119's IP address: Arbitration request declined
Hello Shim119,
In response to your request for arbitration, the Arbitration Committee has agreed that arbitration is not required at this stage. Arbitration on Wikipedia is a lengthy, complicated process that involves the unilateral adjudication of a dispute by an elected committee. Although the Committee's decisions can be useful to certain disputes, in many cases the actual process of arbitration is unenjoyable and time-consuming. Moreover, for most disputes the community maintains an effective set of mechanisms for reaching a compromise or resolving a grievance.
Grievances about the actions of an administrator (like their decision to block an editor, or protect or delete a page) should also be approached in the first instance on the administrator's talk page, but administrators are expected to be accountable and you can ask on the administrators' incidents noticeboard for the action to be reviewed. In the case of deletions by deletion discussion, you can also open a deletion review.
In all cases, you should review Wikipedia:Dispute resolution to learn more about resolving disputes on Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia community has many venues for resolving disputes and grievances, and it is important to explore them instead of requesting arbitration in the first instance. For more information on the process of arbitration, please see the Arbitration Policy and the Guide to Arbitration. I hope this advice is useful, and please do not hesitate to contact me or a member of the community if you have more questions.
For the Arbitration Committee,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:32, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
File:NY excelsior plate.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:NY excelsior plate.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:45, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
File:NY2007Plate.png listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:NY2007Plate.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:46, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Deletion discussion about NJPlates
Hello, Shim119
Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Mattdaviesfsic and it's nice to meet you :-)
I wanted to let you know that I've asked for a discussion about the redirect NJPlates, created by you. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 2#NJPlates.
If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Mattdaviesfsic}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 04:49, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
File:NY excelsior plate.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:NY excelsior plate.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 12:55, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
May 2023
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ✗plicit 23:43, 23 May 2023 (UTC)@Explicit: I wish you would have handled this more maturely. You know the file we’re under discussion and you still chose to delete them anyway. Shim119 (talk) 13:25, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Indef blocked July 2023
@Ferret: I know you & bbb23 annoyed at special:diff/1163996903 but if i agree to stick to mainspace and stay away from admin issues and noticeboards and images will you unblock me? i pretty much went a bit overboard with that WP:RFC. Making another account is only going to make things worse and I don't want to use the {{unblock}} because it's going to be denied with a template cookie-cutter denial. deal? Shim119 (talk) 15:45, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
- I will not support an unblock of your account. It's not about being annoyed, you are clearly WP:NOTHERE. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:47, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
@RickinBaltimore: Of course you won't because you were WP:INVOLVED in the XRV discussion and you didn't like what i said and beside up until the image dispute i had no issues. Shim119 (talk) 15:52, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
- You're just digging a deeper hole. You refuse to follow WP:GAB and are already threatening to evade your block. I absolutely will not support an unblock as it's clear you "Don't get it." -- ferret (talk) 15:55, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
@Ferret: what are my options? Shim119 (talk) 15:56, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
Shim119 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I was blocked because I wrongly disputed recent administrator actions and uploading a copyrighted images. I had no excuse for what i did. I agree to stay away from admin issues and noticeboards plus uploading images if i am unblocked. If I wish to upload an image I will ask permission first. If I breach this agreement with this or another account then this block will be justified.
Decline reason:
Implied threats to sock are not going to help your case. Courcelles (talk) 16:10, 7 July 2023 (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.
@Courcelles: quote me where i am threatening to sock. that would be an exercise in futility. if i know the edits from the "socks" will be reverted why should i waist my own time instead if discussing it here? Shim119 (talk) 16:16, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
- Implied threats. In the first paragraph of this section. At any rate, acting as if your article edits are valuable is going to be very difficult for you. Courcelles (talk) 16:41, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
@Courcelles:, you're capable of auditing the IP address i'm using if you see any other logged in activity from the anon block on, this block is justified 100%. I'm trying UTRS --Shim119 (talk) 16:51, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
@Bbb23: would you agree to discuss this on IRC chat? I'd like to resolve this in a proper way if you say no then i'll just see with UTRS holds. It's clear you took exception to my last two threads on WP:AN the WP:RFC was the last straw. is there any way i can get unblocked and be able to edit in line with WP:HERE? just the mainspace. mind you? i have not made any attempt to repost the image surrounding my first block so that should be reason enough to put an expiration date on the current one. Shim119 (talk) 17:28, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
- I don't use IRC, but even if I did, I don't see any reason to discuss your conduct off-wiki - and that includes UTRS. Unless you plan to post private information, there is no reason to appeal through UTRS.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:32, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
I am posting here just to allow that, in your recent complaint about my rangeblock (which wound up serving as the latest of many spectacular examples of WP:BOOMERANG, but that's really neither here nor there) you had one small point: Despite what I put in the edit summary, it appears the block had nothing to do with any edits to this article. Either it was an accidental mistyping and I had that text on my clipboard for some other reason (doubtful, I think, because the control key is positioned such as to make accidentally hitting it instead of shift unlikely), or (more probably) I had confused two IPs/ranges I was blocking (In any event it also appears that I mistakenly hit enter as I was trying to complete the entry, a mistake I make more than I would like that explains the lack of closing brackets since the two keys are so close together).
You at most deserved an explanation for this. Daniel Case (talk) 17:59, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
Shim119 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Two things disappoint me here: *Courcelles surmising I would continue to edit en.wiki in spite of the block under different account despite there being no clear evidance of that. *An anon IP rambling[1] about my image dispute that lead to me being blocked for 60 hours. I haven't made any attempt to repost the image since. As far as i know, I was blocked due to my lack of mainspace editing, criticizing other editors and because someone felt the RFC was unauthorized and I had no right to post it. RFC's are posted by all kinds of editors, not just administrators. I never said I was right for what I did. Shim119 (talk) 13:45, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Declining per comments below. This is a CU block, and this needs to be taken to be reviewed by a CU or ArbCom at this point. RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:08, 13 July 2023 (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.
This is now a checkuser block, specifically User:BuickCenturyDriver. It involves evidence that can't be publicly reviewed. I'm not going to review this block and can't tell reviewing admins what to do, but they can either use their own judgement to decline the unblock request (ignoring other problems I personally think the sockpuppetry is sufficiently publicly obvious), or they can decline in order to point the user to appeal a checkuser block, or both. The only appeal avenue is another CU or the Arbitration committee. I'm yanking TPA to prevent moot tedium. -- zzuuzz (talk) 11:54, 13 July 2023 (UTC)