User talk:Wyatt2049

This user is in school.

This user is taking a wikibreak and may be away or inactive for varying periods of time.
Although he may occasionally be able to do some editing, messages left for him may not be replied to for a while.
He will be back on Wikipedia when school is over.

>Very low pending changes backlog: 1 pages according to DatBot as of 16:00, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, leave a message below

Archives

Archive 1

Archive 2

GANs

Please do not nominate articles for good article if they clearly need significant work to make the grade. If you are not a significant contributor, you should consult those editor's on the article's talkpage before nominating. Noah^Talk 15:02, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Poldark 2015 edit war

I see that you have reported me for the edit war on the Poldark page. In the reasons for my edits I have repeatedly stated where my edits came from (BBC website, archive.org is a good source to see what I mean) - so that I never explain is a blatant lie. And the series 5 regular/main cast members were reduced to recurring - are you kidding me? Who is wrong then, the BBC for listing them as main? Anyway, I have stopped editing and have no wish to continue either. I have attempted to make a detailed cast list but it apparently conflicts with those who want to generalize. Heida Reed a guest in series 5, true but she was not visible to others so therefore the *nuance*.

I do not edit before I know the edit is correct, others may follow the same example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.85.47.175 (talk) 15:12, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

barnstar

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thanks for diligently watching weather-related pages Chetsford (talk) 16:06, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

UNNAMED

Thanks Wyatt, I appreciate the welcoming! Baxterbaby--Baxterbaby (talk) 20:37, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:41, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

@ NinjaRobotPirate

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).

Wyatt2049 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Here is my situation. I go to school, and the IP address is public. What I think happened is that the CheckUser picked up that they were the same IP. I did not do anything. Wyatt2049 | ^{(Talk) or (Stalk)} 21:44, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Duplicate appeal, see below. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 00:40, 5 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.

That's possible, but you've at least engaged in logged-out vandalism. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:51, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NinjaRobotPirate Okay. I will never do any vandalism again. I promise. Please do not block me. --Wyatt2049 | ^{(Talk) or (Stalk)} 21:57, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

El C

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).

Wyatt2049 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I got blocked for doing vandalism while not logged in. I promise to never do it again, and I beg for 1 chance. I am asking for forgiveness. Please let me have 1 chance. I solemnly swear that I, Wyatt2049, will never do vandalism again ever.

Decline reason:

Just hours ago you lied to us when you wrote: "Here is my situation. I go to school, and the IP address is public. What I think happened is that the CheckUser picked up that they were the same IP. I did not do anything." You acknowledge here that you did vandalize when logged out. There's no reason to think that we can trust you on this right now. If you're interested in further appealing, I suggest you read WP:SO. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 00:40, 5 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.

El C, I gave you a barnstar. I am really sorry. Please unblock me. I promise to do constructive edits to weather pages when I get unblocked.

L235 Okay. I will not lie. Please trust me. Give me one chance please. I spent an hour crying over it. I have disobayed God by lying. Please give me one more chance. With regards, Wyatt2049 | ^{(Talk) or (Stalk)} 00:46, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How many times did you vandalize logged out? TonyBallioni (talk) 00:47, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TonyBallioni a few times. Will I get unblocked? --Wyatt2049 | ^{(Talk) or (Stalk)} 00:56, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, at least you're somewhat honest. You vandalized multiple times over a few weeks logged out from what appears to be a residential IP. You also created a sock on a shared IP hoping we'd think it wasn't you, but, it's very likely you based on behaviour (are there really multiple people on a shared IP who care about storms and Wikipedia and like to vandalize? Unlikely.) So, there's the issue that you are still lying about the other account, so no, I'm not going to unblock you. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:59, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TonyBallioniPlease. If you do, you can monitor me all of the time. I promise to never ever do this again. And can we even make a deal that if I get caught again, I get blocked and banned forever? --Wyatt2049 | ^{(Talk) or (Stalk)} 01:04, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, we won't monitor you all the time, nor will we issue a ban or block that can never be lifted. The standard offer is a reflection of Wikipedia administrators' typical willingness to grant second chances—I think this is your most promising opportunity at this time. Mz7 (talk) 01:11, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

== Okay ==--69.115.242.17 (talk) 05:56, 7 September 2019 (UTC) Noted. --69.115.242.17 (talk) 05:56, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Dense Smoke Advisory

Hello, Wyatt2049

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username SportingFlyer and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I’ve proposed an article that you started, Dense Smoke Advisory, for deletion because it meets one of the relevant criterion. The particular issue can be located in the notice, that is now visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to prevent the deletion:

Edit the page
Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
Click the Publish changes button.

But, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the raised issues. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|SportingFlyer}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

SportingFlyer T·C 14:13, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Dense Smoke Advisory for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dense Smoke Advisory is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dense Smoke Advisory 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. SportingFlyer T·C 22:48, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:7LSatellite.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:7LSatellite.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Wikiacc (¶) 17:42, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of 2020 Atlantic hurricane season for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2020 Atlantic hurricane season is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2020 Atlantic hurricane season 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. Willbb234^Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 16:30, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Wikipedia:Template proposal

Hello, Wyatt2049. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Wikipedia:Template proposal".

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! UnitedStatesian (talk) 06:04, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

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/Wyatt2049, 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.

HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 14:21, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]