User talk:Drhunterhamilton21

January 2021

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at User:Oknazevad. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 02:57, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. oknazevad (talk) 02:59, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Frozen (2013 film). Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:43, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent further vandalism.

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 ~~~~}}. ~Anachronist (talk) 02:56, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: based on CU information this is probably not a compromised account. Mz7 (talk) 22:02, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mz7: Good to know. The contribution history shows a marked change of behavior for the last few edits, which suggested to me a compromised account. As a compromised account, it cannot be unblocked anyway. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:09, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Appeal

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).

Drhunterhamilton21 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello Anachronist, The reason why I want to be unblocked from editing is that I want to expand the Wikipedia article “2020 Utah windstorm” since I lived in Utah during that time and want to add more sections from Utahns stories about the windstorm.

I know what I did a couple of days ago was wrong and there’s no excuse for what I did, I’m sorry for vandalizing the Wikipedia pages.

The reason why I vandalized Oknazevad’s page is that I was editing “Lotteries in the United States” by adding state flags next to the state names and he caused an editing conflict which made me lose my temper. But I do know it doesn't change the fact that I vandalized his page.

Can you please unblock my user accounts? and I promise not to vandalize any more Wikipedia articles. I'm willing to do any community service or work to undo what I did. Drhunterhamilton21 (talk) 22:38, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You worked hard to demonstrate you cannot be trusted, as you are unwilling to abide by Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and are unwilling to control your temper. Nothing here convinces me otherwise. Your best bet is to wait six months without editing, then apply under WP:SO. You'll want to indicate what specific steps you have taken to control your temper or otherwise, what has changed and how we know we can trust you. Yamla (talk) 11:24, 18 January 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.

It wasn't just a user page you vandalized. And you don't need to address me. Another administrator has to decide whether you are to remain blocked. The fact that you so easily lost your temper over a simple guideline-compliant revert (explained adequately in the reverter's edit summary) doesn't fill me with confidence about what would happen moving forward if you were unblocked and then experienced another small altercation. Making bold edits and being reverted is part of participating on Wikipedia, and you need to be emotionally equipped to handle that with grace and maturity. Disputes and disagreements abound here. You need to convince the reviewing administrator that unblocking you would be a net benefit to the Wikipedia project, instead of creating clean-up work for others. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:00, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Ok I won't come back for another 6 months thanks for giving me a suggestionDrhunterhamilton21 (talk) 03:27, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Appeal & Taking Responsibility

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).

Drhunterhamilton21 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi Anachronist,

Since you haven’t seen me for a couple of days, you know I did a lot of things in the past week that I hate, that I wish I never did at all in the first place because yes I apologize for all the vandalism I did on Wikipedia because vandalism is something a child does, not something an 18-year-old man does.

So this appeal is just mostly me just wanting to own up to my crap, wanting to own up to all the drama and vandalism I did on Wikipedia. So I’m gonna apologize for all the things I did on Wikipedia and if you don’t accept the apology that’s ok. I’m also wanting to write this appeal of me just saying everything I wanna say and ways I want to help be part of a change and not be a part of a problem which was something I’ve been.

So I’m gonna apologize for all the vandalism I put on a Wikipedia user. I did make the decision to vandalize a Wikipedia user and vandalize a Wikipedia article, I made that decision.

Let’s now start with the Frozen (2013 Film) article I vandalized. I did think in the past it would be funny to vandalize a Wikipedia article, I did know it was wrong to do that. But during my ban I decided to look into the history of why I did was so wrong and why administrators were so upset because doing that was stupid and wrong and I vandalized a Wikipedia article as an adult and that’s insane.

I’m so sorry, I am so sorry for vandalizing that article and me thinking it was okay to vandalize an article, no it wasn’t okay and it’s not a funny thing to do especially when it took a lot of work to do. Besides I can’t imagine if I worked hard to make an article and then someone to mess it up, that’s insane and I’m so sorry and I don’t know how to even fully apologize because I feel like it’s something I shouldn’t be able to get out of. I should be banned permanently from editing because there’s no amount of apology that can undo it, undo the impact it had on the website, and the impact it had on administrators.

I never vandalized a Wikipedia article in anger, I just decided to make jokes that went way too far.

Now let’s talk about vandalizing Oknazevad’s page. I did also decide to vandalize a Wikipedia user’s page out of anger which was a really idiotic idea I did. I should've messaged him asking to not cause any more editing conflicts, instead, I decided to vandalize his page out of anger which was wrong and now is the biggest regret ever and I’m so sorry.

Now if you accept my appeal thank you, if you don’t I totally understand because it’s something I don’t deserve to be forgiven for, I’m willing to be blocked permanently from editing and lose everything.

From now on I’m wanting to spend the rest of my time putting good into Wikipedia and not putting hate, vandalism, and drama into articles or users. I’m ready to show you through my actions and want to be unblocked so I can apologize to Oknazevad for vandalizing his page several times.

Please don’t think I’m forcing you to accept my appeal because that’s not what I’m trying to do since it’s something I shouldn’t be forgiven for at all.

Thank you for reading my appeal.

Drhunterhamilton21 (talk) 17:34, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As it says, come back in six months from your last edit; that would mean the standard offer is available to you now starting August 20, 2021. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 21:06, 20 February 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.

Thank you for your apology. You also need to explain the multiple accounts you have created. And you did state above that you would wait six months and then appeal your block per Wikipedia:Standard offer.

Reviewing admin: please also see the appeal from an account claiming to be this user's father on my talk page at User talk:Anachronist#Apology. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:07, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apology to Oknazevad

Dear Oknazevad,

I'm so sorry for vandalizing your page several times and I knew I should've talked to you asking not to cause any editing conflicts with me but I was stupid and vandalized your page multiple times and now I deeply regret doing that and I should not be forgiven for doing that. Next time can you please not blow my work from wikipedia off next time?

Thank you!

Ideas for Wikipedia Adminship

When I looked at the requirements to be a Wikipedia administrator it said that there are no official requirements to be a Wikipedia administrator. So I think to make a Wikipedia user an administrator and show them they’re trustworthy enough to be granted adminship, I have some ideas for requirements to get adminship from Wikipedia.

Ideas for Requirements for Adminship on Wikipedia:

1. The Wikipedia user must be registered for at least 5 years.

2. The Wikipedia user must not have been blocked by another Wikipedia administrator.

3. The Wikipedia user must have made at least 10,000 edits.

None of those are administrator criteria, nor should they be. Some admins have demonstrated their abilities after only a year in, many have been blocked in their early days before learning the rules, and edit count mean nothing if the edits are mostly maintenance edits or made using automated tools. What matters more is behavior under pressure or during disputes, deep familiarity with the policies and guidelines, experience in administrative areas like AFD and AIV, experience resolving content disputes, examples of where good judgment was demonstrated, and so on. The community decides in a week-long debate. For the candidate, it is a stressful experience.

If you are looking to be unblocked, you really need to stay away for six months. The clock restarts whenever you post something. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:43, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know

Final Post

I'm just giving a final message and wanting to say that I'm not gonna be coming back on wikipedia ever again. Which means I'm not gonna be active on my wikipedia account anymore, not gonna be editing anymore, because I just absolutely hated what I did, I was a bad wikipedia editior ever since day one if you look at my contribution history. I just don't want to be on wikipedia anymore these days since like I said doing wikipedia is not my type of thing anymore and me being a wikipedia vandal. I don't blame you for blocking me at all since I was given enough warnings to stop and I just kept vandalizing wikipedia regardless of the warnings I was given so this is 100% my decision to leave wikipedia forever.

Your draft article, Draft:David Anthony Ware

Hello, Drhunterhamilton21. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "David Anthony Ware".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 08:46, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Cannabis in Libya

Hello, Drhunterhamilton21. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Cannabis in Libya, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:03, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]