User talk:Adc95

April 2019[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Gisborne South, Victoria. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Julietdeltalima (talk) 23:02, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

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 ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 23:24, 29 April 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).

Adc95 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand inappropriate editing/trolling behaviours are a nuisance for Wikipedia admins and jeopardise the integrity of the encyclopaedia. I am hoping that by having the ban lifted after several years, that I will be able to add to pages of personal interest and knowledge in accordance with Wiki guidelines and contribute to the resource. I remain a frequent user of Wikipedia as a reader and trust that after almost 5 years, I have understood the nature and appropriateness of the ban. Adc95 (talk) 11:02, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This unblock request has been declined due to your history of vandalism and/or disruption to this encyclopedia. However, we are willing to give you another chance provided that you can earn back the trust of the Wikipedia community. To be unblocked you need to demonstrate and confirm that you are willing and able to contribute positively to Wikipedia. You can do this by:

Familiarizing yourself with our basic rules.
Reading our guide to improving articles.
Picking any pre-existing article you wish to improve.
- If you have trouble choosing an article to improve, see this index of articles needing improvement for ideas.

Once you have decided on the article you will propose improvements to:

1. Click the Edit tab at the top of that article;
2. Copy the portion of the prose from that article that you will be proposing changes to. However:
  - do not copy the "infobox" from the start of the article (i.e., markup like this: {{infobox name|...}}),
  - do not copy any image placement code (i.e., markup like this: [[File:Name.jpg|thumb|caption]]),
  - do not copy the page's categories from the bottom of the page (i.e., markup like this: [[Category:Name]]),
  - and do not copy the stub tag (if there) from the bottom of the page (i.e., markup like this: {{Foo stub}});
3. Click edit at your talk page and paste at the bottom under a new section header (like this: == [[Article title]] ==) the copied content but do not save yet;
4. Place your cursor in the edit summary box and paste there an edit summary in the following form which specifies the name of the article you copied from and links to it (this is required for mandatory copyright attribution): "Copied content from [[exact Name of Article]]; see that article's history for attribution."
5. You can now save the page. However, if your edits have any citations to reliable sources (which they should), add the following template to the end of your prose: {{reflist-talk}}. Once you have added the template, click Publish changes.
Now, edit that content. Propose significant and well researched improvements by editing the selected portion of the article. Please note that we are not looking for basic typo corrections, or small unreferenced additions; your edits should be substantial, and reflect relevant policies.
When you are done with your work, re-request unblocking using {{unblock}} and an administrator will review your proposed edits.
- If we (including the original blocking admin) are convinced that your proposed edits will hopefully improve Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, you will be unblocked.

If you need help while working with your proposed edits, you may add "{{Help me|your question here ~~~~}}" to your talk page. Thank you. Yamla (talk) 11:09, 21 January 2024 (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.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Adc95 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Edits in proposed section completed Adc95 (talk) 11:59, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

It looks like the original block was for vandalism, or at least messing around disruptively. Since it seems clear that you are making a good-faith attempt to propose some changes productively, I'm happy to give you the chance to do that. I'll note that I haven't reviewed the proposed changes myself in any depth, I merely note that you appear willing to engage constructively and to seek help if you need it - that's all positive. Drop by the WP:TEAHOUSE for friendly advice about editing as and when you need it. Best wishes, Girth Summit _(blether) 13:36, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Girth Summit for the unblock, I understand that you haven't reviewed the proposed changes in depth, but am I free to paste my proposal into the original article or should I be more incremental in editing existing pages? Perhaps this is a question for the Teahouse, but any advice is appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adc95 (talk • contribs)

Your mention is correct but it won't get to the person you're talking to unless you sign your post. When making comments, make the habit of ending it with four tildes to sign your posts (Example: "Hello Adc. ~~~~"; the format is what you see here, not what I wrote in the code to show you this example.) As for article editing, the advice is BE BOLD. Make an edit. If it is a substantial edit, wait a while to see if anyone objects to your changes. If no one does, take that as a sign you did it right. If someone does object, see WP:BRD for how to proceed. In this specific case, since you've already done the work, it's fine if you want to update the article with your version and see if it sticks. If it does not, and in general, being a new editor, it is best to make small changes per edit and few edits per day per article, until you get the hang of it. Good luck! Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:52, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate it, thank you! Adc95 (talk) 04:26, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New comments generally go at the bottom of a thread, and don't forget to sign your posts by typing four tildes. (Like this: ~~~~).

You're not under any editing restrictions - you can go directly and make your changes. If anyone reverts you though, or protests about your sourcing, listen to them, and have a discussion with them on the article talk page. Good luck. Girth Summit _(blether) 10:58, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]