User talk:RUE4533

Welcome

Hello RUE4533 and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your contributions, such as the ones to (Fuck A) Silver Lining, do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox (but beware that the contents of the sandbox are deleted frequently) rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Dawn Bard (talk) 03:51, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

RUE4533 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I made a constructive edit but a filter was triggered. I am very new to wiki editing and due to my ignorance I thought the error was because I accidentally published a blank page while I was editing. To solve this I made a new account and submitted the same constructive edit. I got the same filter message. I reported it to false positives and people noticed that I had two accounts. Compassionate727 wasn't sure if I was a sock puppet belonging to an LTA, so he asked Bbb23 for advice. Bbb23 said he wasn't aware that I am an LTA, and further discussion with filter managers at false positives confirmed this, but he blocked both of my accounts for sockpuppetry. I apologize for starting multiple accounts, I did not realize how serious a problem sockpuppetry is. Moving forward I plan on using this account only. I also apologize for posting an unblock request on the other account, I thought I had to get all the blocks lifted. You can ignore that as this account will be the only one I use moving forward.

Accept reason:

Looks like a newbie error rather than a serious attempt to do damage, so I will unblock. Please review the sockpuppetry policy so you don't run afoul of this kind of thing in the future. (It would probably be best to stick to one account anyway). ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:26, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you taking the time to review my block ♠PMC♠. Thanks! RUE4533 (talk) 17:06, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Mild point for future reference, usually when you mention someone else in conversation you don't want to copy/paste their signature, as it can look confusingly like someone has signed the middle of a comment block. Normally you'd just type out their username, and if you want to ping them you can use one of the user link templates, formatted like this: {{u|their username here}} or {{@|their username here}}. If you need anything, feel free to drop me a line on my talk page, I usually respond pretty fast. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 06:41, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like this user didn't read Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks, although in his defense, nobody ever pointed him to it. Hopefully the comments scattered around User talk:Bbb23 and Wikipedia:Edit filter/False positives/Reports (sections JHHN8878 and WRRE4767) are enough to make sense of what this is about. To summarize, a constructive edit by this user triggered a hidden filter (commonly used to prevent long-term abuse), which he reported to false positives. I saw from checking the page's abuse logs that he had two accounts, and I wasn't sure whether to interpret this as an innocuous attempt to circumvent the filter or evidence of multiple socks belonging to an LTA, so I asked Bbb23 for advice. He said he wasn't aware that it was an LTA, and further discussion with filter managers at false positives confirmed this, but he blocked both of the accounts for sockpuppetry. I believe this block was erroneous, as this user never actually violated the sockpuppetry policy (which outlines specific disallowed uses for multiple accounts but doesn't forbid having them) and is entirely unnecessary, as blocks are designed to prevent disruption and this user has never done anything disruptive. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 20:57, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, RUE, while I don't expect that you'll to resort to sockpuppetry again, it is important for your chances of succeeding with this appeal that you clearly disavow using multiple accounts in the future; I suggest you edit your unblock request to that effect (and perhaps clean it up a little; it probably isn't necessary to copy-paste three other messages into it whole). —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 02:39, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

Well, that was quite the ordeal. Here's a beer to help drink the stress away! I hope this mess hasn't been a turn-off for you, and that I'll see you again around the Wiki sometime. Please let me know if there's anything else I can help you with! —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 00:34, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for all the help Compassionate727! I'm grateful that there are helpful people in the community like you. And thanks for the beer haha, cheers! RUE4533 (talk) 17:06, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Scott Chesak (June 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Ratnahastin were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Allmusic, Spotify and discogs are not reliable sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Scott Chesak and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Ratnahastin (talk) 05:03, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Ratnahastin, I really appreciate you taking the time to review my article submission. I would love to improve the sources per your comment. I noticed that other musician articles use Allmusic, Discogs, and streaming service credits as sources. Is there a better source that is considered more reliable that I should cite for credits instead? Thank you. RUE4533 (talk) 15:37, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, RUE4533! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Ratnahastin (talk) 05:03, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Scott Chesak

Hello, RUE4533. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Scott Chesak, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:08, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]