User talk:Caleb David Smith

Welcome!

Hello, Caleb David Smith, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!

September 2015

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Caleb has 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: Caleb was changed by Caleb David Smith (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.912952 on 2015-09-13T19:37:09+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 19:37, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 2015

Welcome to Wikipedia. I have noticed that some of your recent genre changes have conflicted with our neutral point of view and verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend you seek consensus for certain edits by discussing the matter on the article's talk page. Thank you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:00, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Manic Drive. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Please discuss your changes on the article's talk page, instead of just restoring your edits when other editors revert them. Thank you. bonadea contributions talk 18:23, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Manic Drive

I am new to Wikipedia, and I did not realize when I became a member that my edits would continuously be undone. Manic Drive IS A CHRISTIAN CONTEMPORARY ROCK BAND! I know this because I am a personal fan. Will someone please tell me why they aren't. Caleb David Smith (talk) 18:30, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message on my user talk page. Nobody "works for Wikipedia" - we are all volunteers (except for a few people who are employed by the Wikimedia Foundation). The people who have the tools to block editors are not employed by the encyclopedia, they simply have administrator rights. I am not an administrator and cannot block anybody from editing (much less ban them), but like all other editors I can report editors who don't follow Wikipedia policy to the administrators, who will look into the situation.

Please take a moment to follow the links in Walter Görlitz' message. We all have to follow the Wikipedia policies on verifiability and reliable sources when editing. We can never use our personal knowledge as a source for information, if the information is contested. We have to provide reliable sources. Again, please take this discussion to the article's talk page (Talk:Manic Drive) and propose your changes there. Please also note that the link CCM leads to a so-called disambiguation page - follow the link and you'll see what I mean - and so it can't be added as a genre - it looks like "CCM" is simply an abbreviation for "Christian Contemporary Music" and so you wouldn't need two links to that page anyway. Cheers, --bonadea contributions talk

This is your final warning. You may be blocked from editing without further notice the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Urban Meyer. RA0808 ^talk _contribs 19:13, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Read, please

On Urban Meyer, you removed a citation and added information that did not have a citation. Please don't do that without giving a very good reason in your wp:edit summary. Please read wp:verifiability. Verifiability is a cornerstone of Wikipedia. Always wp:cite wp:reliable sources (RS) when adding significant information (such as where someone lives). Be especailly careful with wp:biographies of living persons (BLP). Please read wp:The five pillars of Wikipedia which is basis of Wikipedia. When someone leave you a warning message such as those above, please read them and click on the links for more information. That should (not always!) let you know why and what to do. Cheers Jim1138 19:44, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, Jim1138.

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 21:04, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

It appears that your behavior is out of control and that you're not here to contribute to this project in accordance with our editorial and behavioral standards. Your edits have ranged from genre warring to unsourced and biased editing and have not contributed positively to articles. When reverted, you've responded with egregious personal attacks, accusations of bad faith, and harassment. Furthermore, you've used Wikipedia as a soapbox for your religious beliefs. While you've "apologized", your most recent personal attack came immediately after you apologized for a prior personal attack. This indicates that despite your "sincere" apologies you cannot be trusted to edit collaboratively and without making personal attacks when disputes arise. You've indicated that you will continue to harass a user until they accept your apology,[1] and then you attempted to report him as a vandal for ignoring your apologies.[2] All you've done so far is disrupt the project. You have contributed nothing positive and I can find no indication that you are willing or able to do so. This behavior is not welcome here. If you want to edit Wikipedia, you need to read and become familiar with all of the content policies and behavioral policies. If and when you have done that, you may appeal this block after reading the guide to appealing blocks. Swarm ♠ 21:44, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

i agree that i was out of control, i apologize, please tell me i will be reistated, i will never do that again. Signature of Divine (talk) 00:34, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I realize how wrong that I was, i was just angry because none of my edits were completed without being removed. Please tell me when I will be reinstated, I am truly humbled and I sincerly apologize. Thank you, Caleb David Smith. Signature of Divine (talk) 00:36, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I accept your apology and appreciate you saying that. You will be reinstated without issue if you do the following simple things:

Log in with only this account. Do not use sockpuppets to get around the block or you you will use your opportunity to return to good standing.
Familiarize yourself with the content policies and behavioral policies
Agree to be mentored by Walter Görlitz, as he has offered to do.
Appeal the block and indicate how you've remedied the problem (i.e. abide by the three above conditions). That's all you need to do! Swarm ♠ 05:24, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mentorship

This could be the shortest (and easiest) mentorship in the history of Wikipedia. I came to your talk page to inform you that I have agreed to be your mentor, but you seem to have dug yourself a grave.

Blocking admin: I would like to allow CDS to continue to have talk page privileges here until such time as he has shown that it would be irresponsible to continue with that privilege.

Caleb. I feel as though I may have pushed you into the current state which is why I'm offering to help set you on the right path.

First, scattered lesson: Wikipedia has a hierarchy of accepted behaviour. It starts with the Wikipedia:Five pillars. It's what holds Wikipedia up. Under the pillars, the next most important thinks are the policies. That's where those behaviour and content policies come into play. After that, there are editing guidelines. There are lots of those. Then there are Manuals of Style. Fewer of those, but some are not common knowledge. There are projects that work on various areas of Wikipedia. Since you're interested in Christian music, I'll point out that there's a Christian music project. The most active members there are also active with other music projects. You can tell the first few apart by looking at the top of the page. Projects are listed as such in the page name itself. You should get to know the policies first then work into the guidelines for areas you're interested in. Manuals of Style should be understood as well.

With all that said, I'd like you to do three things.

As Swarm, the blocking admin, stated, you should read WP:BEHAVE (behaviour) and WP:CONPOL (content policies), including all of the linked pages in those sections. Once you have read those, you should reply here with any questions you have. It may be appropriate to summarize your take-home from each section here.
You should apologize here using this account. This is the only page you're allowed to edit using the Caleb David Smith account, so take advantage of that, but don't push it. Don't argue with other editors. I'm OK if you want to argue with me. Wikipedia is a community and no one is allowed to be discourteous or bully other editors. If you feel that I have bullied you or been discourteous to you, I apologize. Don't bother to make an unblock request here until you've cooled down and dealt with my first request. It will show good faith and will show that you're interested in Wikipedia, not just showing how smart you are or something else. It's taken me about nine years on Wikipedia to realize that if something has been wrong for a while on Wikipedia, it doesn't need to be fixed in a heartbeat. Give it time. If you need to talk about a subject every article has a talk page. Use it.
Do not ever try to circumvent Wikipedia discipline. It seems, from the apologies above, that you have created a new account. That's what's known as WP:BLOCK EVASION and Wikipedia:Sock puppetry. Since you're not allowed to edit Wikipedia when you're blocked, any edits made by you under another account, whether it's a user account or anonymously, can be reverted without question.

Do you think that you can do this? Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:27, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can do this, I have appealed my block! Caleb David Smith (talk) 21:39, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Walter Gorlitz! Caleb David Smith (talk) 21:39, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're not ready to be unblocked. I suspect that you'll be be ready in no less than a week depending on how our schedules combine.

Did you summarize your learning from those policy pages? I checked Special:Contributions/Caleb David Smith and it looks like your edits have been to this talk page.

Do you have any questions about what you read?

When you respond, I'll ask you a few questions about potential situations.

After that—consider this your syllabus—I'll have you talk about what projects you're interested in working on and I'll point you to some Manuals of Style that we'll go through the same process on and then the same with a few projects. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:02, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's difficult to mentor you when you keep getting yourself blocked. I'll hold on until you either file an electronic unblock request through Wikipedia:Unblock Ticket Request System or find some other way to get unblocked. Alternately, you might want to go one step lighter and just ask for talk page editing privileges back so we can continue this work. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:46, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I read it.

Thank you Walter, I understand why what I did was wrong, please help my account to be unblocked, thank you for your support. Caleb David Smith (talk) 19:10, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Walter Gorlitz

I agree to be your, as Trump would say, apprentice. Ian a fan of bands like Manic Drive, Skillet, Third Day and the greatest band ever, THE NEWSBOYS! Caleb David Smith (talk) 20:56, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your actions below have made it impossible for me to follow through with mentoring you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:33, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

original unblock reason

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

understand what you have been blocked for,
will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Courcelles (talk) 22:56, 18 September 2015 (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.