User talk:APCBasketball

Welcome!

Hello, APCBasketball, 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 Josh Kempin, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --allthefoxes ^(Talk) 23:58, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Josh Kempin

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 Josh Kempin 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 a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event, but it 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 removed 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. --allthefoxes ^(Talk) 23:58, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

December 2015

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Josh Kempin has been reverted.
Your edit here to Josh Kempin was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rt4KOcDkIwc&feature=youtu.be) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 00:15, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Possible SPI Case

You are suspected of sock puppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/APCBasketball. Thank you. In veritas (talk) 01:07, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

December 2015

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Guerillero | Parlez Moi 01:57, 1 December 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

The article I was writing was legitimate and credible with legitimate sources. Now I have been forcefull silenced and I am creating a petition for Josh Kempin to have his own wikipedia page. How many signatures do I need? APCBasketball (talk) 05:01, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I fear that all the signatures in the world won't justify an article if you can't provide reliable, published sources; this is especially important in the case of biographies of living people. The content you had tried to submit was far and away not appropriate for an encyclopedia, and you have not addressed the very clear abuse of multiple accounts. — Earwig ^talk 05:16, 1 December 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

How come there is no video verification section on Sources. I also have new sources which are not posted on social media and therefore reliable. The social media ones only add to the information of the article. I also wish to be given another chance as I was given no warning about being blocked indefinetly and I believe this to be unfair. I would like the opportunity to establish myself as a credible member of the wikipedia community.

Decline reason:

This request fails to address the two issues that got you blocked - the abuse of multiple accounts, and the blatant unsuitability of the content you created at that article. If you can't see the latter and continue this silly campaign to reinstate it, I can see you ending up having talk page access revoked for trolling. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:48, 1 December 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.

{unblock|reason=Please listen to my unblock request I want to become a helpful member of the wikipedia community please APCBasketball (talk) 08:48, 1 December 2015 (UTC)}[reply]

Only one unblock request needed at a time. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:45, 1 December 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

I understand. Is there anything I can do to become unblocked? I only wish to use this account and won't be making Josh Kempin pages. Please I'm happy to prove myself as a valuable contributor to the wikipedia community. Just let me know if there's anything I can do. I just want to apologise as I hadn't read the proper information on writing articles on living people and uses of multiple accounts. I have now read this information and understand why I have been blocked. I won't make these mistakes again. Please give me a second chance.

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 15:37, 1 December 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.

Reviewing admin please see User talk:HessyMate, where the socking is continuing with another unblock request on that account too. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:17, 1 December 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

This is ridiculous. These are too separate accounts, this one is used by me only and the other by me and a friend. We are hoping to get both of them unblocked so we can both use wikipedia again. It states in the wikipedia guidelines that having multiple accounts is legal as long as it's not used for socking. Neither me or my friend plan to use it for socking, we just want to be unblocked so we can use wikipedia normally. Please consider my request and realise that Hessymate is not a sock account, its the second account of mine used by a friend.

Decline reason:

The article you and the other accounts attempted to create was patently silly, and you are clearly not here to build an encyclopedia. Too much time has already been wasted on this; talk page access has been revoked. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:32, 1 December 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.