Hello, FortUser, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:
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 need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place ((Help me))
on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Liz Read! Talk! 05:02, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
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:
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. Liz Read! Talk! 05:03, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
Additionally you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the ((Ctopics/aware)) template.
Selfstudier (talk) 07:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
The page 2023 Hamra shooting has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done for the following reason:
WP:G5 / WP:ARBECR (WP:A/I/PIA)
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.
Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or 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. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:13, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: ((unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~))
. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.
Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Wikipedia:Sandbox, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Untamed1910 (talk) 02:07, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:Sandbox. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Untamed1910 (talk) 02:07, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing.
If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:Sandbox, you may be blocked from editing. Untamed1910 (talk) 02:08, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
You need to stop right now. What you are doing is WP:GAMING and by itself is sanctionable behavior. If you want to edit in a restricted topic area you should actually spend some time on the talk pages and editing other pages to get a better understanding about how these pages are put together. But if you keep this up you will be blocked again, and even if you get to 500 edits an admin will remove the permission as it was clearly gotten through gaming the system. So stop, right now. nableezy - 02:12, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
One thing I personally don't really understand is why 99% of Wikipedia's new editors seem to have no issue with avoiding the few highly-contentious restricted topics and editing about trees, animal species, ancient history, sports events, whatever, while a (perceived) 1% isn't just magically drawn towards extended-confirmed restricted topics but then also continues to seek for loopholes, exceptions, clarifications, instead of joining the other 99% through the Task Center or the community portal. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:43, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Please see WP:ANI#User: FortUser actively gaming EC nableezy - 02:19, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
You have recently made edits related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. This is a standard message to inform you that post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Weller (talk • contribs) 16:33, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
If this was the first article that you 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 that the page you created, Selenium (software) \ Wikipedia application \ Proof of concept, was deleted as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or 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. Courcelles (talk) 00:03, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
((unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~))
. Courcelles (talk) 00:05, 17 April 2023 (UTC)For someone warned so extensively on gaming to be making pages like Selenium (software) \ Wikipedia application \ Proof of concept is unacceptable. You have disrupted this project enough. Courcelles (talk) 00:07, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
FortUser (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I showed how Selenium could be misused to edit Wikipedia. In order to prove my concept, I created a new page and let my program generate text. I explictly stated that unauthorized use constituted gaming although without a proof of concept, any design is useless. Furthermore, I let the admin know about a potential way to create edits on Wikipedia nefariously. Therefore, I thought what I did was legitamite. I will no longer make any dummy edits to game the system. I apologize. Please unblock me.(talk) 00:14, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
That you were disrupting Wikipedia to prove a point is not a valid reason to be unblocked. This unblock request does not show how you will not continue the behavior once unblocked nor does it demonstrate understanding of the reason for the block. Aoidh (talk) 00:25, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
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.
FortUser (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I genuinely was unaware of the policy to not disturb Wikipedia in order to make a point. I previously didn't understand that; my bad. I had a specific motive to get WP:ECP - to edit controversial topics. I will no longer game the system by making inprodutive edits - ever. All the other rules have no benefits if I violate them and I won't. Please unblock me and retire this account so I can have a clean start. I will no longer seek ECP. Thank you so much. FortUser (talk) 00:35, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
No. This is precisely the point I was making above. You don't seem to have read any of the editing policies, and don't show much willingness to comply with the ones you are directed to. We welcome new editors but there comes a point where cleaning up disruption is a waste of everyone's effort. Take some time away from editing articles, and read up on what the policies and guidelines are. Then propose some useful draft edits on this talkpage and ask for others to review them. This will be useful proof that you have taken the time to learn about how to edit constructively. Until you have some evidence that you can edit constructively, your unblock requests will keep being declined. -- Euryalus (talk) 00:40, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
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.
FortUser (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
How about a timed block instead of an indefinite one? I understand that I can no longer game (make useless edits) under any circumstance. I will read up on guidelines in the meantime. Also, on the talk page, who will read it?
I only violated two policies WP:GAME and WP:ECP. I only violated the WP:GAME precisely because I understood WP:ECP. I did not violate a whole sleuth of policies, and I will not afterward. I understand I need a break from editing but isn't an indefinite block a little harsh? How about a couple days and a fresh start after that? I did make some productive edits, as you can see on my edit history. I am competent but I made a huge mistake.
Alternatively, you could revoke my chance get ECP for several months. I will no longer be motivated to game anymore. I also understand that it was a terrible idea to give someone the resources to violate the rules. I will no longer do so in the future. It is only my third time and I will be extra careful so there will never be a fourth.
To summarize I understand why I ways blocked (repeated violations on WP:GAME and posting information on how to break the rules) and I will ensure I won't violate the rules again by double-checking with the rules or an admin when a matter seems hazy and reading the rules on Wikipedia. I will also no longer chase ECP for a while. Please reduce the block time.
Speaking of good edits, how about hide my revisions on Selenium (software) from the public? Someone else can access the revision and cheat.
Decline reason:
Us putting an end date on the block does nothing to convince us that you understand the reasons for the block and will not repeat them. The block will be removed when you can do that. This request doesn't. I concur with my colleagues below that your only path forward is the standard offer- you should take time to absorb everything you have been told, and maybe edit another Wikimedia project(like Simple English Wikipedia, or another) where you can make productive edits that can be used as evidence of your changed behavior. Six months from the block would be the middle of October, I suggest you wait until then. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
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 is there left to do? Please advise.I would suggest looking at Wikipedia:Standard offer and going from there. Making subsequent unblock requests only minutes after the decline of the previous one (ten minutes and five minutes, respectively) does not show that you're taking the time to read and trying to understand the reason for the block and the decline of the unblock requests. You said
please adviseand my advice is to slow down. The rapid-fire unblock requests and the ECP-gaming issue have the same underlying appearance of rushing too fast. Take a few months, read, absorb the information, and then make an unblock request. Show that you're not going to rush, that you understand the underlying issues, and that they will not be repeated. - Aoidh (talk) 02:53, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tohu wa-bohu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chumash. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 17 April 2023 (UTC)