User talk:Codedon

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

{{helpme}} Whoa! What... I blew it, but I don't know how. How??! Codedon (talk) 05:49, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see all the history User talk:Codedon/Archives/My Rocky Beginning here, so...well, you are blocked;  Chzz  ► 06:43, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Having not spoken to the admin who re-blocked you, my best guess is this edit. The language used has me not quoting you. Even the edit summary "gotta chide this guy" is a bit much. If you wish to appeal this block please use {{unblock|STATE YOUR REASON HERE}} here on your talk page. delirious & lost ☯ ~hugs~ 06:14, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You have been indefinitely blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abuse of editing privileges. To contest this block, please email the blocking admin or place {{unblock|your reason here}} on your page, including an explanation why you feel you should be unblocked.


{{helpme}}

I'm still not quite sure how I violated the "terms of unblock". Could someone please do me a favor and contact Peter? Could he give me the exact terms I broke? Thanks, Codedon (talk) 03:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yep; I'll drop a note on his talk page. If you don't get any response in a day or so, please use another helpme and we'll get another admin to have a look.  Chzz  ►  03:48, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Chzz. Codedon (talk) 03:50, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}} Forgive me if I'm annoying anyone, but can someone delete this and this. They're both spam, and get the guy blocked. Codedon (talk) 04:09, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. VerballyInsanet|c 04:19, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll probably be pointing stuff out for a while since I can't fix it myself. Hope no one minds. Codedon (talk) 04:17, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}}

{{helpme}}

Hello there. You are currently blocked. The helpme template is to assist editors in good standing, we cannot take the word of blocked users on editorial or administrative actions. Please use the {{unblock}} template to request unblocking and after that your concerns can be addressed. I will block Notadumbshit. Keegan (talk) 04:58, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keegan, I know you are a good guy, but the stuff above is urgent. There are spammers, defamers, and copyright violators. I can't ask for an unblock until Peter, the guy who blocked me, tells me why I was blocked. Please trust me on this. Codedon (talk) 05:24, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
While I agree that you should seek unblocking first, I have to disagree with Keegan on the rest. Those were problems that needed to be addressed regardless of your status as an editor, especially the copyright violation in the last diff provided. Regards SoWhy 06:18, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why I re-blocked[edit]

I would have explained in more detail before if I didn't think it was obvious.

Mostly you broke the point to "take the utmost care to be highly civil with every editor you come across. You should in no way make comments that put down their work." I deliberately made that a very high standard, because I didn't want to see you harrassing other editors, and putting them off from contributing to Wikipedia. Edits like this one as pointed out above, are not on. Neither are your breaches of WP:BITE, such as this and the others that have already been deleted as vandalism (so only viewable in deleted contributions by admins). The linked example would have been bad enough if directed at a true vandalism only account, but it was made even worse by it being a good faith editor.

You also didn't seem to be doing a lot of actual improving of articles (and note that I said you should use article talk pages, to discuss articles, I wanted you staying away from personal editor conflicts and their/your talk pages.)

You will then also remember that I unblocked saying that I'd re-block without warning, and that it was your last chance. I trust that is sufficient explanation for you, and any admin who wishes to reblock. Finally, I would just ask that in case any other admin is tempted to unblock that they email me first. Peter 10:20, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

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).

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

Request reason:

I will analyze my reasoning behind making the edits I made after I was unblocked. I hope you will divine from my reasoning that my edits were made with honest intentions and that I did not intend to come off as a troll. I'm hoping that this issue can be amended because after I saw St. Mary's Church, Chesham, I wanted to put Kaithal honour killing case up for a Good Article Nomination. *User talk:Codedon/Archives/My Rocky Beginning — moved my talk page here because I believe that it's a standard practice for editors to "archive" their page when it gets too long. *Kaithal honour killing case — improving/rewording the article. *Talk:Kochi, India — pointing out non-existent image. *User talk:Malleus Fatuorum — collaboration on Kaithal honour killing case. *Talk:Right to science and culture — undoing edit that redirected page inappropriately to a high school. *User:Ifhank and User:Haneswe1 — removing spam. *Hanley Ramírez — undid edit that defamed this baseball player; decreased his runs and other statistics to very low numbers. *User talk:PhilliesPhan22 — warning user. You mentioned specifically that this edit was one factor in your decision to reblock me. I am under the impression that we are to speak sternly to people who disrupt our project and discourage them from continuing to do so. Am I right? This "good faith editor" that you speak of did not even address the reversion I made. He instead directed me to another page with which I was not interested in dealing. Note that my undo of his edit was not reverted later. *User:Iridescent/SMC — as I said in my edit summary, I made "minor grammar fixes [and] added appropriate commas". I was not trolling. If you look back at my edit, I did not mess up the text; I did what I said I did — made improvements to the quality of the prose. *St. Mary's Church, Chesham — adding the changes I made at User:Iridescent/SMC. Note that no one reverted my revision there. *Talk:St. Mary's Church, Chesham#My Comments — pointed out grammar mistakes. There were two misplaced modifiers. I could not find ways to fix them, so I figured that Iridescent was much more creative with sentence structures and would be able to fix those. *User talk:Harikrishnan10 — welcomed this user. Like the vandal warning thing, I am under the impression that we are supposed to welcome new users warmly, but we should caution them about the hard work and sweat that comes from our commitment to this project. We should also tip them off that being blocked in the state I'm in is very deplorable or "gruesome" (distressing). I'm not having the time of my life being blocked like this. *St. Joseph, Louisiana — undoing censorship. Perhaps my edit summary was not appropriate, but the undo was. The edit I reverted removed everything that pointed out race. I think this rewording detracted from the significance of the mayor being the only black mayor with all his predecessors being white. The fact that black students were arrested reveals that this election was racially-charged. The edit that I reverted made the election not as significant as it truly is. *Sahuarita High School — reverted defamation. I was quite disturbed that someone would have the temerity to dare insult their principal. Everyone, regardless of their size, should be treated equally and should not be discriminated against. *User talk:Thevic007 — warning ("chiding") a rude user. I'm not quite sure what was wrong with my edit summary. "Chide" means to "express disapproval of [someone's actions]". "You should in no way make comments that put down their work." Are we not to express disapproval of this guy's edit? Are we instead to commend him for his contribution, though it is unhelpful? As I said above, talking sternly and discouraging vandals from editing is necessary to maintaining order on this order-bereft encyclopedia. At least, that's the way I think of it. Does anyone disagree? :I did improve articles. The bulk of my article work was to Kaithal honour killing case, but I also did St. Mary's Church, Chesham. Also, are my vandal reversions to be overlooked? Didn't I at least help counter those who take pleasure from disrupting our project, even though maybe my warnings were not appropriate? Furthermore, I did use article talk pages to "discuss articles". Namely, Talk:Kochi, India, Talk:St. Mary's Church, Chesham#My Comments, and Talk:Kaithal honour killing case. The last one just got contentious because I was suspicious about Iridescent watching me, but I guess that doesn't matter since everyone is already watching me. I did start out trying to give tips to the guy who originally wrote the article. :Peter, please give me another chance. I know I've already had my final chance, but it was purely a misunderstanding of my part of how vandals should be dealt with that led to this. I'm really not a troll — I'm a constructive editor who is still somewhat a beginner that's not clear with the ways of Wikipedia. Please I promise to only revert vandalism; I won't give any messages to people. :If I did drive any "good faith editors" away, I apologize and promise that it will not happen again. Thanks for your consideration, Codedon (talk) 19:50, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Sorry. Peter went out on a limb for you and reversed the block of another administrator. His conditions were crystal clear, including "You take the utmost care to be highly civil with every editor you come across. You should in no way make comments that put down their work." The edits illustrated above not only cross this line, but they clearly cross this line, which makes your odd attempts at rationalizing them quite curious. Other odd comments here ('suspicious about Iridescent watching me') and in your harassing behavior that drew your first block make me very sure that you would quickly return to your disruptive behaviors. Kuru (talk) 00:25, 21 April 2010 (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.

  • I am not going to unblock you, but I will leave your unblock request here to be reviewed by another admin.
  • Reviewing admin: if after reviewing the above you still want to unblock, please drop me an email first. Thanks, Peter 20:02, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Do you have any comments on anything I said? Do you need me to clarify anything you did not understand? Codedon (talk) 21:54, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No. Peter 22:08, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Can whoever who comes here notify Kuru? Thanks. Also could someone delete Talk:Notes receivable. Also, delete Danny Yoo and block the user. He's clearly not trying to contribute anything useful. And delete his page. It's putting down others.
Kuru, I'm not so sure that you understand my dilemma here. Seeing this decline here was like a pummel in my stomach. You say my edits "clearly cross this line", but I've already "rationalized" them. My last sentence was the most important: "I know I've already had my final chance, but it was purely a misunderstanding of my part of how vandals should be dealt with that led to this." Can't you accept human error? I was not clear with the vandal policy, so I figured that giving them a customized message discouraging them from continuing to vandalize would help. Also, how am I rationalizations "odd". Can you provide reasons that you did not believe I really was undoing edits for the good of Wikipedia? Please respond according to my edits on these pages: User talk:Harikrishnan10, St. Joseph, Louisiana, Sahuarita High School, and User talk:Thevic007. I've fully read over Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks and believe that my request above meets every requirement. Codedon (talk) 05:54, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request[edit]

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

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

Request reason:

A little history

I was blocked on April 8, 2010, for "trolling, harassment". I was unblocked by Peter under conditions that can be found here Can someone undelete that page?. After violating these conditions, I was reblocked. My talk page access was then revoked. After some cross-wiki activities, my account was globally locked. I appealed this local block on November 7, whereupon MuZemike restored talk page access. I logged in to edit, but remembered that my account was locked. It took me till the 29th to find a helpful, responsive admin/steward; I thank Avraham for being that user.

Recognition of wrongs

I recognize that I have transgressed the policies. I promise to eschew areas that will get me in trouble. I ask that the community give me another chance per the standard offer. I will cherish this opportunity. I will not waste the community's time. I will be a constructive editor of the community, remaining collegial and collaborative with my fellow Wikipedians. Thank you for your consideration, Codedon (talk) 04:48, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Seven months have passed, and I am willing to give you one last chance. However, if you step out of line at all again my recommendation is that you are blocked permanently. Edits such as this and even more so this are unacceptable, and the fact that after making them you seemed to think you had done nothing wrong does not augur well for your ability to be constructive, so please try hard to resist the temptation to behave in a similar way again. I do hope you can succeed in doing better this time. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:04, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the revision this user is referring to is this one. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:39, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you undelete that for me, please? Codedon (talk) 05:45, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done. The page, complete with the unblock conditions, is back at User talk:Codedon/Archives/My Rocky Beginning. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:04, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much, James! Codedon (talk) 00:03, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request for adoption[edit]

I have thought hard about your request for adoption. To be honest I am in two minds about whether I was right to unblock you, in view of the clear warnings you had at your previous unblock that it was a last chance. I have also now read more of your early history than I had read when I unblocked you, which, unfortunately, has increased my doubts. However, I hope it was the right decision, and I am willing to do what I can to help, so I am willing to consider your request. However, before I decide definitely, I have two of things I want to be clear about. Firstly, you said on another user's talk page "my first experience with adoption was rather unpleasant". Could you clarify what you think the problems were? (I have seen for myself what went on, but I want to know how you perceive the problems that took place.) Secondly, if I do agree to adopt you, I will do my best to help you, but if I feel you are not being constructive I will block you again, and very probably will recommend that this time it is permanent. Please don't take this as a threat. The fact that I have unblocked you when there were others who would never have considered it shows that I am genuinely willing to give you a chance, and having done so I hope you will prove I was right. This means, of course, that I hope there will be no reason to even consider blocking you, but I will consider an adoption only if you accept that this is a genuine last chance, and that you are prepared to state that you accept adoption under this understanding. If I do agree to adopt you I will be offering to give my time and effort to help you, and I am prepared to make that offer only if I am certain that we both understand exactly what the offer is. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:55, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request for adoption - New reply[edit]

I am removing my earlier post from here. Naturally you can put it back if you want to, but I have thought more about the matter, and decided that the answer I originally gave was not a good one, so here is my improved version. You say you were at high school when you edited before, and are now at college. Wikipedia didn't exist when I was 13, but if it had existed I think I was just the sort of silly teenager who would have edited disruptively. By the time I was 18 I would never have considered doing anything so stupid. I am 100% willing to believe that someone with your editing history can improve with more maturity, and I am happy to give you every chance, and to help if I can. I am sure you realise that if you slip back into your old ways you will be blocked, very probably permanently this time, but I hope and expect you won't. You are totally welcome to ask on my talk page for help and support if you want it, and I will try to look at how you are doing from time to time and let you know what I think. That applies whether or not I adopt you, but if you want to make that into a formal agreement of adoption then I am happy to do that. However, that is what adoption will mean if I do it: unlike some adopters I do not give a series of lessons or anything like that. If you still want to be adopted, let me know on my talk page. You can put {{Adoptee|JamesBWatson}} on your user page if you like. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:32, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what is expected of me, and hope that you will act as a helpful, constructive guide. Thank you for your offer, and for your willingness to unblock me. I will add {{Adoptee|JamesBWatson}} to my userpage. Codedon (talk) 23:58, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Advice[edit]

You can take this as just friendly advice, or as the first bit of adoption work, whichever you prefer. I have just looked over your editing since you were unblocked. It all seems fine, but I would suggest using edit summaries to give a brief indication what your edits are doing. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:41, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will do that hereafter. Codedon (talk) 00:02, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what this says[edit]

APPEAL TO YOU Reg: [BRAHMAN PUJAN] , [UNIVERSAL PRAYERS] . written by [Naresh Sonee] On wikipedia , These above two pages are far older than the present article [Brahman] References of above titles are also available on New York site - http://www.printsasia.com/BookDetails.aspx?Id=445813482 Meanwhile, Can your good selves in Wiki Project Indian Community re-create a precise pages on [Naresh Sonee] & his book [Brahmand Pujan] – [Brahmaand Pujan] . However, Sonee is the writer of this book [Brahmand Pujan] written in 1999 . registered with Government of India- HRRD. Details of the registration is provided here on http://brhmaandpujanbook.tripod.com/ . More than sufficient, news and reviews are there on http://brhmaandpujan-news-reviews.tripod.com/ Since 5-6 yrs, for one or the other reason pages of [Naresh Sonee] & [Brahmand Pujan] are faced by communal bias from outside India so these articles over and again get deleted here in Wikipedia for minor reasons. However, many hits of - Naresh Sonee reflects on google search engine also. So, I request Wiki Indian community to kindly come forward and generously help these two pages to grow, as I am fed up to fight my case alone here [left] and moved out long back. Meanwhile, such an important info/issue on ‘Indian literature’ which adds & spell ‘new meaning /dimension’ to Brahman -should it stay lost else ignored? Your community panel has to judge at last. Myself, will not be on Wikipedia, for the same i apologise, but- pls. help these two pages to get reinstalled, reap, sow and grow, if you too feel so, I appeal to do this munificent favour. Regards- Dralansun (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:38, 27 December 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Since you asked for my help on this, I attempted to read the above message, but like you found it almost impossible to understand. I then looked at the history of the editor who posted it here, and found a rather troublesome editor. If you are interested you can read messages that I and others wrote to the editor here. The editor has now removed the messages. If you come across any more nonsense from this person let me know, and I will consider whether to block them. Otherwise I suggest forgetting about it. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:17, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I will, James. Thank you very much for deciphering the context of that. You're a good adopter! Codedon (talk) 21:50, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Progress[edit]

I just thought I would let you know that I do from time to time have a look to see how you are getting on. I usually don't say anything, because there usually isn't anything to say, as you are getting on fine without me. I am pleased that you have justified the faith in you that I showed by unblocking you when other admins wouldn't touch you with a barge pole. They did have good reasons for distrusting you, and I confess I was not at all sure whether I was doing the right thing, but now I see I was. You have clearly put quite a bit of thought and effort into Manoj-Babli honour killing case. I hope the exams went well. You know where to find me if you want to. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:33, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, James, that really made my day! I am humbled by your praise and the enormous amount of faith you have had in me. I'll be sure to contact you if I need anything. Codedon (talk) 19:08, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Manoj-Babli honour killing case[edit]

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Manoj-Babli honour killing case you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 8 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Best regards, Lord Roem (talk) 23:12, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have listed suggested improvements on the review page (linked above). Regards, Lord Roem (talk) 03:22, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

You have new messages (last change).

/ƒETCHCOMMS/ 20:03, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Manoj-Babli honour killing case[edit]

The article Manoj-Babli honour killing case you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Manoj-Babli honour killing case for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Lord Roem (talk) 03:03, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I did it! Thank you so much for reviewing the article. Now for FA... Codedon (talk) 00:03, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unadoption[edit]

Since you have not edited in substantially more than two months I am going to remove the adoption notice from my user page. You are, of course, welcome to ask me for help again if and when you return to editing. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:11, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Invite to WikiConference India 2011[edit]


Hi Codedon,

The First WikiConference India is being organized in Mumbai and will take place on 18-20 November 2011.
You can see our Official website, the Facebook event and our Scholarship form.

But the activities start now with the 100 day long WikiOutreach.

As you are part of WikiProject India community we invite you to be there for conference and share your experience. Thank you for your contributions.

We look forward to see you at Mumbai on 18-20 November 2011

WikiProject India Tag & Assess 2012 Contest[edit]

Hello friends, we are a number of editors from WikiProject India have got together to assess the many thousands of articles under the stewardship of the project, and we'd love to have you, a fellow member, join us. These articles require assessment, that is, the addition of a WikiProject template to the talk page of an article, assessing it for quality and importance and adding a few extra parameters to it.

As of March 11, 2012, 07:00 UTC, WikiProject India has 95,998 articles under its stewardship. Of these 13,980 articles are completely unassessed (both for class and importance) and another 42,415 articles are unassessed for importance only. Accordingly, a Tag & Assess 2012 drive-cum-contest has begun from March 01, 2012 to last till May 31, 2012.

If you are new to assessment, you can learn the minimum about how to evaluate from Part One of the Assessment Guide. Part Two of the Guide will help you learn to employ the full functionality of the talk page template, should you choose to do so.

You can sign up on the Tag & Assess page. There are a number of awards to be given in recognition of your efforts. Come & join us to take part in this exciting new venture. You'll learn more about India in this way.

ssriram_mt (talk) & AshLin (talk) (Drive coordinators)

Delivered per request on Wikipedia:Bot requests. 01:11, 12 March 2012 (UTC) The Helpful Bot 01:11, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Asian 10,000 Challenge invite[edit]

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 01:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red World Contest[edit]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Codedon&oldid=1139098653"