User talk:Ballinskary/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Ballinskary. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
October 2022
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 01:38, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Ballinskary (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Re-requesting an unblock pending review and approval of the edits proposed herein, as requested by 331dot. Thanks for taking the time to review this.
Edit, 26 October 2022 - Tagging the original blocking admin and adding more sufficient context for whomever reviews this request. I was blocked by Bbb23 a couple of weeks ago for making excessive and frivolous edits to my user page in the absence of any contributions to the site as a whole. I was, at the time, unaware that this was a violation of any policies and was genuinely unaware that this behavior potentially warranted a block. I was blocked without warning in spite of the fact that I was under the pretense that my behavior was innocuous. My understanding of this behavior is now aligned with the relevant policies. Through the second chance provided by 331dot, I have read through many of the policies and the manual of style and have proposed edits to the lead section of an existing article that I hope are substantial enough to warrant an unblock and a second chance at demonstrating that I can, in fact, be a constructive member of this community. Just because I have had an account for a while now does not automatically disqualify me from being a newcomer to editing.
Edit, 29 November 2022 - Zzuuzz 331dot Bbb23 Woke up to a bunch of edits on my talk page this morning. Before I get my hopes up that my block is being reviewed, were these edits due to vandalism? I see in the edit history that my unblock request was declined but it looks like those edits were undone. Thanks. Ballinskary (talk) 02:11, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
Accept reason:
Request accepted. -- zzuuzz (talk) 16:40, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
Ballinskary (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I do not understand why I was blocked. Because I made edits to my user page? Am I not allowed to do that? I've read the article you linked to and don't understand how what I was doing even applies to it. Because I don't edit enough articles on a regular basis or something? I am just very confused as to why I got blocked. I'd like to be unblocked, please, and maybe be provided with some kind of explanation as to why I was blocked so I don't do it in the future. Thank you. Ballinskary (talk) 02:03, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I am going to provide you with a process through which you can demonstrate a substantive edit(more than fixing spelling or grammar) that you would make. There is no deadline for this, take all the time you need to find something that you would like to edit. You are free to decline and make an unblock request without doing this, but I think it would help you. 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:
- Click the Edit tab at the top of that article;
- 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}});
- do not copy the "infobox" from the start of the article (i.e., markup like this:
- 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; - 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." - You can now save the page. However, if your edits will include 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. 331dot (talk) 10:06, 15 October 2022 (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.
@Bbb23 Okay, I re-read the meta page you linked to and now understand that repeatedly editing my own user page falls under the criteria for not being here to build an encyclopedia. Sorry about that. I was just messing around with my user page but I understand now why I was blocked. For the record, I read wikipedia constantly and have interest in being a more involved editor here. I hope to make that a reality at some point in the near future. I obviously can't edit the original block request but I'm hoping this message is taken into consideration for that request. Thank you. Ballinskary (talk) 03:06, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- You actually can edit the original unblock request, it may be modified at any time. However, if you are replying to messages like mine, it should be a standard, unformatted comment. What edits do you want to make? 331dot (talk) 09:15, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- @331dot I see, I do not see that option but that's possibly because I'm on mobile at the moment. First, I want to wipe out most of the changes to my user page, because I didn't intend to leave them there and was blocked whilst I was between edits. It's worth mentioning that I didn't even realize that making edits to my own user page was problematic in any way, but I've read the relevant section of the policies and guidelines that the blocking admin pointed me to and now understand why the behavior is discouraged. I will use the sandbox next time, that's 100% an honest mistake. As an editor in general (I believe that's what you are asking), I want to edit anything that needs copy editing, editing for style, or anything that needs to generally be re-written, regardless of topic. I realize that I've been terrible at editing anything other than my style sheets and occasionally my user page (which primarily contains links to pages) and that I should make a more concerted effort to contribute as an editor. This account has been open for a few years now and I've never had this issue before. I believe I understand why I was blocked, but am more than open to any further commentary and - of course - will plan to contribute more as an editor in the future. Thanks for taking the time to review my request. Ballinskary (talk) 09:36, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- Editing your user page is fine(if the content is consistent with WP:USERPAGE), but it cannot be the only thing that you do here.(nor experimenting in your sandbox)
- The mobile version does not have full functionality, you may find it easier to use the full destop version in a browser, even on a device; if you scroll to the bottom you should see "desktop" and you can tap/click it to switch between the versions. Just a tip if you have difficulty- people do edit successfully on mobile only, but it can be challenging for some. 331dot (talk) 10:06, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- @331dot Okay, thanks for getting back to me. I will propose an edit when I have some time later today and am at my desktop. Ballinskary (talk) 11:05, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- Just wanted to follow up directly to let you know that I completed the assignment per your suggestion and re-submitted the unblock request, which I see in CAT:RFU. I know you guys are crazy busy and I'm not looking for a decision right now, just want confirmation it was received and will be reviewed as soon as you guys can get to it. Also, I want to make sure that my proposed edits are congruent with admin expectations for this type of task. Thanks. Ballinskary (talk) 12:24, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- @331dot I see, I do not see that option but that's possibly because I'm on mobile at the moment. First, I want to wipe out most of the changes to my user page, because I didn't intend to leave them there and was blocked whilst I was between edits. It's worth mentioning that I didn't even realize that making edits to my own user page was problematic in any way, but I've read the relevant section of the policies and guidelines that the blocking admin pointed me to and now understand why the behavior is discouraged. I will use the sandbox next time, that's 100% an honest mistake. As an editor in general (I believe that's what you are asking), I want to edit anything that needs copy editing, editing for style, or anything that needs to generally be re-written, regardless of topic. I realize that I've been terrible at editing anything other than my style sheets and occasionally my user page (which primarily contains links to pages) and that I should make a more concerted effort to contribute as an editor. This account has been open for a few years now and I've never had this issue before. I believe I understand why I was blocked, but am more than open to any further commentary and - of course - will plan to contribute more as an editor in the future. Thanks for taking the time to review my request. Ballinskary (talk) 09:36, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- If I am viewing this correctly, you expanded the lead of the article. Two things there- one, you removed the paragraph that described the other company with a similar name and with which the American company has had legal disputes with. Why did you do this? Two, the purpose of the lead is to summarize the content of the actual article. Is the content you propose to add already in the article and you are just summarizing it, or is it new content? 331dot (talk) 13:04, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
- Correct. First, the removal of the paragraph containing the information on legal disputes was primarily due it being the only subject in the lead section with no other information on the topic, but I now see why it would be important to include it here and will happily edit the proposed revisions to include it (if not the entire thing). Second, I chose this section because it appeared to need work, but I do understand that the article does not cover some of the details I added to the lead section. The article as a whole seems to need some attention, and I would be interested in helping to update the entire thing so that it better covers the subject. However, if this renders the proposed edit insufficient, I'd be happy to propose different edits to another part of the article if that's acceptable. Thanks. Ballinskary (talk) 14:12, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
- Been a couple of weeks so I figured I would follow up and see if anyone has had a chance to look at my comments/further review the request. Thank you for your time. Ballinskary (talk) 19:35, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
- @331dot @Bbb23 Could someone please review this? It's been almost a month since I was blocked. I've done everything you have asked in a very timely manner and I believe I have shown a clear understanding of why I was initially blocked. You are clearly attending to other users blocks, so I am just curious what I need to do to get someone to review the work I have done with regard to my unblock request. I appreciate your time. Ballinskary (talk) 13:45, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello Ballinskary. I was summoned here by an earlier ping, which I see has been answered and resolved. I've taken the opportunity to review this request. If you were to ask me whether your proposed edit should be accepted and incorporated into the encyclopaedia, I would probably advise against it. Being bold is one thing, but being bold with a high profile beer(s) with a controversial name is another thing. I'm not even going to critique the proposal, though I appreciate the effort, and that's what this unblock response is for. What I am going to ask myself is whether you understand why you've been blocked, and whether the block is necessary going forward. Having looked around a bit, I think it will be OK. I see Bbb23 has had plenty of opportunity to raise substantive objections. I might as well also ping 331dot. Having pinged them I propose to lift the block in about the next day unless we hear back from them (I'm sure you can tolerate a little extra delay). -- zzuuzz (talk) 19:17, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- zzuuzz Thanks for your comments; that's basically the conclusion I've come to. I would like to give Bbb23 a little more time as you suggest. 331dot (talk) 20:20, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- 331dot Zzuuzz I really appreciate both of you taking the time to review this. Yes, of course I can wait. Ballinskary (talk) 21:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- Zzuuzz 331dot Thank you again to both of you for reviewing my request. Ballinskary (talk) 17:00, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- Good luck out there. Feel free to drop me a ping if you ever need to. -- zzuuzz (talk) 17:04, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks! Ballinskary (talk) 17:06, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- Good luck out there. Feel free to drop me a ping if you ever need to. -- zzuuzz (talk) 17:04, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- zzuuzz Thanks for your comments; that's basically the conclusion I've come to. I would like to give Bbb23 a little more time as you suggest. 331dot (talk) 20:20, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello Ballinskary. I was summoned here by an earlier ping, which I see has been answered and resolved. I've taken the opportunity to review this request. If you were to ask me whether your proposed edit should be accepted and incorporated into the encyclopaedia, I would probably advise against it. Being bold is one thing, but being bold with a high profile beer(s) with a controversial name is another thing. I'm not even going to critique the proposal, though I appreciate the effort, and that's what this unblock response is for. What I am going to ask myself is whether you understand why you've been blocked, and whether the block is necessary going forward. Having looked around a bit, I think it will be OK. I see Bbb23 has had plenty of opportunity to raise substantive objections. I might as well also ping 331dot. Having pinged them I propose to lift the block in about the next day unless we hear back from them (I'm sure you can tolerate a little extra delay). -- zzuuzz (talk) 19:17, 29 November 2022 (UTC)