User talk:Trainrobber66

United Kingdom cladding crisis
	Hanover House, a residential tower block in Sheffield, with its cladding partially removed after failing fire safety tests following the Grenfell fire
Date	June 14, 2017 – present
Also known as	Cladding Scandal
Type	Crisis
Cause	Grenfell tower fire
Outcome	Renovating cladding

Welcome!

Hello, Trainrobber66, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as User:Trainrobber66, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at the our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions ask me on my talk page or you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! GPL93 (talk) 01:51, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Trainrobber66

Please do not create hoaxes on Wikipedia, as you did at User:Trainrobber66. Doing so is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia—and then to correct them if possible. If you would like to make test edits, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. GPL93 (talk) 01:51, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Trainrobber66

Please do not create hoaxes on Wikipedia, as you did at User:Trainrobber66. Doing so is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia—and then to correct them if possible. If you would like to make test edits, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. GPL93 (talk) 11:33, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to River Avon, Bristol have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: River Avon, Bristol was changed by Trainrobber66 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.877743 on 2021-03-01T13:33:48+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 13:33, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Shadbase

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Shadbase requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Luciapop (talk) 16:18, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Dismantled railway

Hello, Trainrobber66,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Joseywales1961, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged Dismantled railway for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. You may find our guide for writing quality articles to be extremely informative. Also, you may want to consider working on future articles in draft space first, where they cannot be deleted for lacking content.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Joseywales1961}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

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

JW 1961^Talk 20:34, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Shadbase moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Shadbase, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ... discospinster _talk 20:45, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Rag Mill

Hello, Trainrobber66,

Thank you for creating Rag Mill.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Consider providing reliable sources to strengthen the page's verifiability.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Meatsgains}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Meatsgains^(talk) 16:17, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rag Mill moved to draftspace — unsourced

An article you recently created, Rag Mill, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs citations from reliable, independent sources to verify its contents and to establish the notability of the subject. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:09, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, as you did at User_talk:Redrose64, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Black Kite (talk) 15:23, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Mexican meat

Please do not create hoaxes on Wikipedia, as you did at Mexican meat. Doing so is considered to be vandalism and is prohibited. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia—and then to correct them if possible. If you would like to make test edits, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:51, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of BTS Stan

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on BTS Stan requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Surya^beej ^⋠talk⋡ 17:51, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Shadbase

Hello, Trainrobber66. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Shadbase, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occurred, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:02, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Rag Mill

Hello, Trainrobber66. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Rag Mill, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occurred, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:01, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Shadbase

Hello, Trainrobber66. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Shadbase".

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:19, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Rag Mill

Hello, Trainrobber66. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Rag Mill".

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! Celestina007 (talk) 19:46, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Muck (video game)

Hello Trainrobber66,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Muck (video game) for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

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

Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 13:19, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

November 2021

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).

Trainrobber66 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

unblock me i'm sorry you hamlet

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 18:05, 3 November 2021 (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 declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Trainrobber66 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was try to make a wiki on a video game Trainrobber66 (talk) 12:27, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You were attempting to create a Wikipedia article, not a "wiki" which is an entire website. It was completely unsourced, and when this was pointed out you made a personal attack. It seems that you lack the skills and maturity needed to participate here at this time. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 15:36, 27 November 2021 (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.

You may not remove prior declined requests while blocked. 331dot (talk) 15:33, 27 November 2021 (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).

Trainrobber66 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Well duh, I was trying to make an article when I looked it up and found no results I legitimately clicked on start a new article silly!

Decline reason:

I agree with the withdrawal of your ability to edit this page. MER-C 18:55, 27 November 2021 (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.

TPA revoked.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:55, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #64847

... is declined. Confirmed sockpuppetry. -- Yamla (talk) 18:44, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #82154 is closed.

Thank you for using the Unblock Ticket Request System. I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you. Please describe concisely and clearly how your edits merited a block, what you would do differently, and what constructive edits you would make. Please read Wikipedia's Guide to appealing blocks for more information. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks). The UTRS software may lock you out for a day or two. Please use this time to review your talk page and the reasons for your block, and to consider how you will address these reasons. Best, -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:06, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #82562

TPA restored. CheckUser data says it's Unlikely for this user to have recently evaded their block. Trainrobber661 (talk · contribs) is them, but no WP:BADSOCK violation. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 18:23, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What should I do at the moment? Trainrobber66 (talk) 19:09, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File an unblock request using {{Unblock}}. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 20:03, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My Unblock Request

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).

Trainrobber66 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I would like to apologize to Simon Peter Hughes for my violent and discriminant language I used against him. These was completely awful words I used directly at him. I would also like to apologize for making multiple sockpuppet accounts to exploit Wikipedia. However, I would like to benefit from editing on Wikipedia by creating useful Infoboxes, Sidebars and Articles on Wikipedia. Thanks, Trainrobber66. Trainrobber66 (talk) 09:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I'm going to suggest that you demonstrate an edit that you want to make on this page, please use the following process to do so. This will help us determine if unblocking you would benefit the encyclopedia.

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. 331dot (talk) 09:24, 5 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.

}}

Still noting My Unblock Request

I am quite patient Trainrobber66 (talk) 10:28, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

It's been a while. I hope you all have a merry christmas and a Happy new year. Trainrobber66 (talk) 09:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DatGuy & 331dot if you could please review my request Trainrobber66 (talk) 18:53, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to want to dive right in to some of the most difficult tasks to do on Wikipedia. I would suggest that you start smaller and build up experience first. 331dot (talk) 19:07, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have a few examples at the moment. Like a few infoboxes and article drafting but yes, I will build up experience to the wiki. Trainrobber66 (talk) 19:47, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of help

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

what do I edit 331dot ? Trainrobber66 (talk) 10:46, 5 January 2024 (UTC)}}[reply]

You may demonstrate an edit to an article of your choosing, as the instructions I provided state. 331dot (talk) 10:50, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I will choose Hitchin Flyover Trainrobber66 (talk) 10:51, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My editing permissions are sill restricted. Do I still edit on the talk page? Trainrobber66 (talk) 10:53, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to ping me or use help me tags. Yes, you demonstrate your edit on this page, please follow the instructions. 331dot (talk) 11:01, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok, sorry Trainrobber66 (talk) 11:04, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've gave a few examples

331dot. Did I do well? Trainrobber66 (talk) 16:52, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should make a new unblock request for someone else to review. 331dot (talk) 17:05, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Trainrobber66 (talk) 18:03, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who should I request? Trainrobber66 (talk) 18:25, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know who to request.

331dot I still don't know who to request Trainrobber66 (talk) 10:19, 6 January 2024 (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).

Trainrobber66 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

DatGuy Yamla Bbb23 MER-C May I request that I be unblocked to create infoboxes, sidebars and a few small articles.

Decline reason:

The most optimistic position I can give is that you didn't follow 331dot's suggestion above, possibly because you didn't understand the instructions or lacked the ability to follow them. However, frankly, I'm not sure that's an accurate position for me to take. I think you are just deliberately wasting our time. Additionally, Confirmed sockpuppetry as Dogman645. Yamla (talk) 11:01, 6 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.

Additionally, I have re-revoked your talk page access to prevent you wasting any more of our time. --Yamla (talk) 11:03, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DatGuy pointed out that I'm almost certainly wrong about Dogman645. There's another explanation that fits that account, that both DatGuy and I agree with. I'll go and unblock that account. However, I'm leaving the block on this account in place. It's already being contested on UTRS. --Yamla (talk) 14:02, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I restored TPA. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:31, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I apologize for wasting your time. Trainrobber66 (talk) 15:33, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Meh. @331dot: The examples you requested can be found here. I'm in favor of unblocking. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:39, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see what 331dot says before doing any more. Relax. Take a break. Spend some time away from the keyboard. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:01, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think you are right. 331dot (talk) 16:23, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23 was the original blocking admin. 331dot (talk) 16:25, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: OK to unblock? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:27, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, i'll let you guys be. Trainrobber66 (talk) 16:27, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla, I'm a bit confused by all this. Do you object to unblocking? From a CU POV or for other reasons?--Bbb23 (talk) 18:11, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for my lack of clarity. From a CU perspective, I see no reason to oppose unblocking. From a non-CU perspective, I think this user is a poor candidate for unblocking but do not object if someone else wishes to lift the block. --Yamla (talk) 18:22, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deepfriedokra, I agree with Yamla, so it's your call.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:29, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks y'alI. I agree, it's a close call. I'll rereview everything and return with a rationale once I'm at a better computer, and after the Bucs beat the Panthers. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:56, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting Trainrobber66 (talk) 18:58, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can bring back a few sidebars Trainrobber66 (talk) 19:09, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't place anymore article content on your talk page. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:38, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok Trainrobber66 (talk) 21:40, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History

It was first constructed in granted by the king to the monks of Bath Abbey in 931, However, the structure itself is dated to about the 18th century. Currently, the mill is used as a venue for weddings and other gatherings. ^[1]

References

^ "Wedding Venues near Bath and Bristol". Priston Mill.

Trainrobber66 (talk) 15:56, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noting that his is in response to 331dot's template:2nd chance challenge. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:00, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've read the Five pillars and the article development. Trainrobber66 (talk) 16:03, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Awaiting blocking admin. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:27, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok Trainrobber66 (talk) 16:28, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23, Hi Trainrobber66 (talk) 17:50, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grenfell Tower Sidebar

Trainrobber66 (talk) 19:10, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Trainrobber66:, I noticed the above's published template {{Grenfell Tower fire}} does duplicate a lot of {{Grenfell Tower}} (although it seems to be near 100%?) if possible can the two be merged? Assuming I can try to add some formatting to allow a sidebar version within the same template like {{Welsh nationalism}} which can be both a navbox or a sidebar. Plus the orange seems a tad inappropriate as reminding of the fire, and quite bright on readers. Dank Jae 20:16, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, It's up for you to decide. I know it was a bit wrong for me to just copy/paste the whole navbox.

Plus the orange seems a tad inappropriate as reminding of the fire, and quite bright on readers Ok, maybe light orange or green idk. Trainrobber66 (talk) 20:19, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Trainrobber66, since merged the two, hope that it is fine. They're both at {{Grenfell Tower}}, for the sidebar add |sidebar=yes after including the template. Reduced the orange to a small lighter orange header if that's okay. Dank Jae 21:00, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DankJae sure, thanks! Trainrobber66 (talk) 21:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interrogative

I'm inclined to unblock you, but when two admins whose judgement I trust over my own disagree, I need to look closer. I'd like to ask some questions to examine your readiness. Your comportment will be a consideration as well as your answers. If you feel angry or stressed, please feel free to step away and calm yourself before replying. If my word choices are hard to understand, please feel free to seek clarification. Take your time. There is no need to rush or hurry. Thanks.

First question. With this edit, you said this account was created in 2018. Special:CentralAuth/Trainrobber66 says it was created in 2020. Why is this? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:37, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I myself may have gotten confused with a different account on another platform that was created in 2018. Trainrobber66 (talk) 19:39, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deepfriedokra any more questions? Trainrobber66 (talk) 20:34, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:39, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Continue. Trainrobber66 (talk) 20:43, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:48, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok Trainrobber66 (talk) 20:49, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Second question. What prompted this? What would you do differently today?-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:49, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think I was personally mad at the time about some issues that I had. Trainrobber66 (talk) 20:50, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

-at the time Trainrobber66 (talk) 20:51, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What would you do differently today? I would take it easy and argue my case as to why my article was taken down. Trainrobber66 (talk) 20:55, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I was edgy for stuff like that. Trainrobber66 (talk) 20:57, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deepfriedokra another question? Trainrobber66 (talk) 21:03, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I only mention you maybe because of Time zones (GMT). Trainrobber66 (talk) 21:13, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:27, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deepfriedokra, when you've completed your questions but before you make a final decision, I'd appreciate a ping. Thanks much.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:31, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh,. @Yamla: too. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:40, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: Certainly. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:35, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deepfriedokra Can we ask tomorrow at some point? I need to go to bed now. Trainrobber66 (talk) 21:33, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. It's late there. Whenever you are ready. No hurry. Take your time. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:35, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What would you do today that you did not do then in article creation? I would of sourced my articles and gave a little more information. Trainrobber66 (talk) 21:38, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deepfriedokra I am back, next question? Trainrobber66 (talk) 10:46, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra Trainrobber66 (talk) 13:14, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And good mourning to you too. Got swallowed by a time sink.. Then took a little walk with my dog. Gah. Need more coffee. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:00, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Third question. I see a number of deleted articles. What would you do today that you did not do then in article creation?

(see above. answer is misplaced)

Fourth question. Editing Wikipedia can be very stressful. Without going into details, have you a stress management program?-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:02, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, I just usually take a break. Trainrobber66 (talk) 15:03, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra next question Trainrobber66 (talk) 15:07, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question 5. Back to question 2 in follow up. What resources are available to you for resolving disputes? Thanks, -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:55, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would ask kindly if we can come up with and agreement together Trainrobber66 (talk) 16:15, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a great answer. Can you be more specific? --Bbb23 (talk) 16:34, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In what sense? Trainrobber66 (talk) 16:36, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What resources are available to you for resolving disputes? Maybe a talk page conversation? Trainrobber66 (talk) 16:39, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:DR -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:04, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but there are more. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:04, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Going back to the question that you asked, yeah maybe I might negotiate or come up with a solution to resolve a Dispute. Trainrobber66 (talk) 17:06, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Reread that linked page. I'll be back. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:11, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra Ok, I will also focus on the content, maybe disengage with the article. I will also think rationally and politely with the opposing user Trainrobber66 (talk) 17:15, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deepfriedokra Are there anymore questions? Trainrobber66 (talk) 17:58, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deepfriedokra Sorry for constantly pinging you but I just need confirmation from you. I apologize in advance to others. Trainrobber66 (talk) 18:58, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Less than ideal, but maybe close enough -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:44, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Trainrobber66 (talk) 19:45, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I'd make an infobox for the United Kingdom cladding crisis

Trainrobber66 (talk) 20:10, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

@Yamla and Bbb23: I think the user has addressed the concerns that led to blocking. It's been a couple of years, so perhaps they have grown. I'm out of questions and might be away from keyboard, so over to y'all. Thanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:59, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have no objection if you wish to lift the block. --Yamla (talk) 16:19, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra: Having read the user's answers, comments, and content postings (including one after you asked them not to, which I removed), and reviewing some of the history of the user's edits and socks, I would not unblock them. I don't think they are mature enough or sufficiently competent to edit Wikipedia, effectively more of a detriment than an asset to the project. That said, if you want to give them another chance, I will not make any more of a fuss...than I already have (smiling). You might want to ask your dog - animals generally have better instincts than humans (yet another smile).--Bbb23 (talk) 16:56, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks y'all. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:03, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock conditions

Zero tolerance for further WP:incivility, rudeness, name calling, etc.
Zero tolerance for WP:EDITWARring.
Recommend WP:AFC for new article creations. If you have new articles being dratified or deleted, then you'll need to send all of your new articles through WP:AFC for vetting.

Please indicate if you accept these conditions. Thanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:54, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I accept these conditions. Trainrobber66 (talk) 19:58, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra Trainrobber66 (talk) 20:08, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It will be a pleasure. Welcome back. It will take a few moments. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:10, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :) Trainrobber66 (talk) 20:10, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is done! -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:15, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I wish the best of you and others! Trainrobber66 (talk) 20:16, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Trainrobber66, just wanted to remind you of @Deepfriedokra's recommendation that you use WP:AFC for new article creations. Philipnelson99 (talk) 21:19, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok sorry Trainrobber66 (talk) 21:20, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you did not heed my advice. Now I must make it an official WP:TOPICBAN. All new article creation must go through and be vetted by the WP:AFC reviewers. If you bypass AfC again, I'll have no choice but to reblock you.
Oh, never mind. Too late, I'm afraid.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 04:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Attempting to add blacklisted spam

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you insert a spam link. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:36, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

as a note, I looked up the website and the url redirected to that sorry. Trainrobber66 (talk) 16:38, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you were trying to do, but sometimes websites are hijacked. Never follow such redirects. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:15, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I apoligize. I should my research. Also what domain/urls are blocked? Trainrobber66 (talk) 18:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's at m:Spam blacklist -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:22, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok thanks Trainrobber66 (talk) 18:23, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Channel to Channel Path moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Channel to Channel Path. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. CycloneYoris ^talk! 16:52, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok Trainrobber66 (talk) 16:52, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good Lord. I just unblocked you. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:14, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to scare you Trainrobber66 (talk) 18:14, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra: also see their creations of Britannia Bridge disaster (which I redirected as an unattributed copy) and then Britannia Bridge fire (which I also redirected as it had the exact same issue). Fram (talk) 18:29, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Someone review my draft and maybe review it. Trainrobber66 (talk) 19:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @Fram:. @Trainrobber66: Please make all further new article creations via WP:AFC. Please slow down. Please stop rushing. Please be more careful. Your enthusiasm is commendable, but you were blocked for WP:CIR. I thought you understood the need for sourcing in articles. You are perilously close to being reblocked. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:45, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No one should try to edit this fast. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:46, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I apologize Trainrobber66 (talk) 19:49, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Links to draft articles

Please do not introduce links in actual articles to draft articles, as you did to Britannia Bridge. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been removed. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 17:28, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sorry Trainrobber66 (talk) 17:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Binley Mega Chippy (January 10)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by KylieTastic was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

KylieTastic (talk) 18:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok Trainrobber66 (talk) 19:04, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Trainrobber66! 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! KylieTastic (talk) 18:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Binley Mega Chippy has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Binley Mega Chippy. Thanks! -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:57, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Trainrobber66

Wut? Other admins? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:05, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry? Trainrobber66 (talk) 19:06, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Note to other admins"? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:08, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oh that, i usually write my stuff there and don't really want any confusion. Trainrobber66 (talk) 19:09, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are not an WP:ADMIN, so some people will take exception to the implication that you are. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:13, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok, sorry Trainrobber66 (talk) 19:14, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your split proposal

Please start the discussion for your split proposal at Talk:SSSniperWolf, per the instructions at WP:PROSPLIT. Thanks. Schazjmd (talk) 21:51, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft

How do I extend/add more sources or content this draft? ''''trainrobber'''' (talk) 18:25, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Links to disambiguation page

When you created {{UK Television}}, you added a link to a disambiguation page, a "behind the scenes" page where there's multiple articles with similar titles; in this case, ITV. This is a common mistake, so don't beat yourself up about it. However, it should go without saying that it's really important that navigation templates have the correct link. One way to make this easier is to go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets, ctrl/cmd + F "Display links to disambiguation pages in orange," and check off the preference to have disambigation links display in a different color. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 21:46, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll do so. trainrobber 21:47, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Britannia Bridge fire (January 13)

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

It doesn't seem like you've addressed the previous reviewer's comments. Would you mind expanding this so that it isn't basically a copy of the section at the Britannia Bridge article?

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:Britannia Bridge fire 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.

BuySomeApples (talk) 02:56, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Stonetoss

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Stonetoss requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stonetoss (2nd nomination). When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. CycloneYoris ^talk! 20:57, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok, sorry trainrobber 21:23, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid

that on reviewing your talk page, you still lack the competence to edit constructively, and that your edits are still disruptive. I will need to reblock you for this reason, though I am sorry to need to do so.-- Deepfriedokra (talk).

I still don't what articles I disrupt, can you provide me a list of articles that did? trainrobber 07:18, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for WP:disruption due to over enthusiasm combined with a lack of competence.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 04:35, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra

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

Trainrobber66 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

im sorry for lacking competence on my wikipedia account. and for disrupting others. i personally think that i was too excited after 2 years of blocking. to see me blocked is just a shame.

Accept reason:

Per conversation below, this user's indef block is reduced to a partial block and the user is now subject to the following conditions:

Trainrobber66 is prohibited from making edits to the article namespace. This is enforced by a reduction of their indefinite block to a partial block that renders them unable to edit articles in the mainspace. Trainrobber66 is permitted to create drafts and is required to use the articles for creation process when doing so. This means that Trainrobber66 can create drafts and submit them for evaluation, but will not be able to edit the mainspace directly.
Trainrobber66 is prohibited from pinging an editor more than once every twenty-four hours regarding the same subject, broadly construed. This means that Trainrobber66 should not post messages tagging people by their username more than once per twenty-four hours about the same sort of thing. This limit applies even if Trainrobber66 is directly replying to the user.
Trainrobber66 is subject to an indefinite one revert restriction; they may not make more than one revert on one page every twenty-four hours, on pain of being blocked.
Trainrobber66 is subject to civility probation for six months. This means that if they engage in name calling, are overtly rude, or are otherwise uncivil, any administrator may block them without further warning. Any blocks made pursuant to this probation will reset the six-month timer, which would restart at the time when such a block expires.

As a conditional unblock, these restrictions are binding upon Trainrobber66 until they are appealed or time out. These conditions may be appealed to the administrator's noticeboard six months from the timestamp in the unblocking administrator's signature below.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:21, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

trainrobber 07:03, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I'm taking a look at this unblock request as an uninvolved administrator. I have a question for you, Trainrobber66: if you are unblocked, what sorts of edits do you plan to make (small grammar corrections, new articles from scratch, expanding existing stubs, etc.), and what topic areas of interest do you plan to focus on? — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:20, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Red-tailed hawk Usually tragic events, buildings around somerset/wiltshire and Bristol. trainrobber 06:38, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Red-tailed hawk trainrobber 10:44, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Red-tailed hawk Maybe also some stubs aswell. trainrobber 13:45, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. You were previously given a conditional unblock with the following three conditions:

Zero tolerance for further WP:incivility, rudeness, name calling, etc.;
Zero tolerance for WP:EDITWARring; and
A recommendation that you use WP:AFC for new article creations.

This sort of thing was a bit insufficient, and it led to you being blocked again after making edits to the mainspace. I understand that you are enthusiastic about Wikipedia, and I appreciate seeing people around here who are enthusiastic. That being said, you have been disruptive in the article mainspace. I think that you might benefit from an environment where you can build your competence as an editor, while also avoiding the sorts of pitfalls that have caused you some trouble in the past.

In this light, I would like to ask you if you would be willing to accept an unblock on the following conditions:

You will be prohibited from editing the article namespace. This means that your indefinite block will convert to a partial block and you will be unable to edit articles. You will be permitted to create drafts and you will be required to use the articles for creation process. This means that you can create drafts and submit them for evaluation, but you will not be able to edit the mainspace directly.

You will be prohibited from pinging an editor more than once every twenty-four hours regarding the same subject, broadly construed. This means that you should not post messages tagging people by their username more than once per twenty-four hours about the same sort of thing (as you did in the three messages preceding this). This limit applies even if you are directly replying to the user.

You will be subject to an indefinite one revert restriction; you may not make more than one revert on one page every twenty-four hours, on pain of being blocked.

You will be subject to civility probation for six months. This means that if you engage in name calling, are overtly rude, or are otherwise uncivil, any administrator may block you without further warning. Any blocks made pursuant to this probation will reset the six-month timer, which will restart at the time when such a block expires.

As a conditional unblock, these would be binding conditions upon you until they are appealed or time out. These conditions may be appealed to the administrator's noticeboard six months from the time of your unblock. Would you accept these conditions? — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 02:17, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I accept these conditions. trainrobber 06:39, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will I still be able to make sidebars and infoboxes? trainrobber 06:49, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but if you engage in edit warring or other disruption there, you are likely to be indefinitely blocked without another chance being given. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:06, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Red-tailed hawk I've just reviewed this unblock request (it was sitting in CAT:UNBLOCK), and my personal view is that this user lacks the necessary maturity and skills to edit Wikipedia, and has already taken a lot of time from multiple administrators that would have better spent improving the encyclopedia. So in my view, I think the request should be declined. Sorry. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:34, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok. trainrobber 10:43, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i was thinking at least getting a chance trainrobber 10:45, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the conditional unblock gives a good framework for the user to develop competence while also preventing disruption in a way more narrowly tailored than an indef. If they can't stick to this framework, then I'd have no objection to re-blocking, but I think that it makes sense to give them a chance here. The blocking admin seems to approve of the conditional unblock as well, so I'll perform it shortly. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:13, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Time zone

What's the time zone in your country? Mines GMT. This is why I'm late to respond. I also go to bed at 9:00pm. trainrobber 07:22, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra Please review the unblock request and this section. trainrobber 07:26, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23 trainrobber 08:18, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A fresh admin with a fresh outlook will review your unblock request. I don't recommend pinging Bbb23, who is going to tell me, "I told you so." -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:44, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is a shame, but I thought you were ready, but clearly you were not. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:45, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra Who do i contact? trainrobber 10:46, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You don't. They will come to you. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:47, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. trainrobber 10:51, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra what kind of new admin do I talk to? trainrobber 13:14, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You simply wait until they contact you. Nothing more you can do. Philipnelson99 (talk) 20:06, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Philipnelson99 ok trainrobber 23:35, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] "Wedding Venues near Bath and Bristol". Priston Mill.

[1]