User talk:Joseph Xavier Darwin

Welcome!

Hello, Joseph Xavier Darwin, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created 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 New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} 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! @Dipankan Upgraded! ^{Tag me!} 07:28, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Purple Triangle(Band)

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 Purple Triangle(Band) 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 band or musician, but it does not 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. @Dipankan Upgraded! ^{Tag me!} 07:28, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Hugo Franlink

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that Hugo Franlink, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It is unambiguous vandalism or an obvious hoax. (See section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please do not introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia; doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — further, Francophonie&Androphilie sayeth naught (Je vous invite à me parler) 02:15, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

November 2012

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for creating hoax/vandalism articles. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 02:24, 9 November 2012 (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).

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

Request reason:

I apologize first of all for creating an article before researching much or completing it. I believe that it was right to delete the page I had created, however I think that I should be allowed to edit Wikipedia once again, or at least have my ip unblocked. Wikipedia is a great way to spread knowledge and I have abused it. I will never abuse this power again and apologize for my previous actions. I just want a second chance. Thank you.

Decline reason:

The two articles you created were both fictional, and are regarded as vandalism. If you wish to make a further unblock request it will need to contain a convincing answer to the question below from Bbb23.--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 10:54, 9 November 2012 (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.

You created two articles, both of which were hoaxes, even though one wasn't deleted under that criterion. How do you explain the Purple Triangle and the Hugo Franlink articles? They don't strike me as not well researched. They appear to be completely made up and effectively vandalism.--Bbb23 (talk) 03:04, 9 November 2012 (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).

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

Request reason:

One of the two articles was a hoax; Hugo Franlink was a real person, but many of what the articles said was untrue. The other was about a small band that, although it does exist, is probably not something that should be mentioned on Wikipedia. I understand and apologize for my previous mistakes, but I have read the guidelines and want another chance at helping to improve Wikipedia. Joseph Xavier Darwin (talk) 21:55, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I find the explanation below to be utterly implausible: when you created the account, create the article, and when you save any edit, you know full well that it's going "live" and not sandboxed. Testing "once" is one thing, a repeat folly is nonsensical.(✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:03, 12 November 2012 (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.

If you are unblocked - keeping in mind that I am far from convinced that you should be - what sort of edits would you be making? What guidelines and policies have you read, and what have you learned from them? Finally, you've effectively lied to us already by posting fictional articles, so why should we believe you when you say you want to help improve the project? Hersfold non-admin^(t/a/c) 22:06, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Hersfold has used his non-admin account, although he is an admin when at home; having said that, I totally support his questions, and need to see answers before any consideration of an unblock.--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 23:12, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - To answer your questions I am new to Wikipedia, and did not know what I was doing. When I created the first page, I did not even know it had been published. I thought it was more of a sandbox type thing. The second article was solely created so that I could test if the article had been published, and much of that article had been written by another contributor who had edited the page. I did not know what I was doing then, and hadn't read the guidelines. I now know the rules and will obey them. The edits I plan on making will all be truthful and honest from now on. I apologize for my previous mistakes. Joseph Xavier Darwin (talk) 23:47, 11 November 2012 (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).

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

Request reason:

I understand that what I have done in the past was wrong and violates Wikipedia's standards of editing, but I have reviewed the guidelines and am committed to contributing to Wikipedia in a serious manner.

Decline reason:

You haven't replied to my questions below. Max Semenik (talk) 10:03, 20 March 2013 (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.

You still haven't answered to Hersfold's question, and before you wrote Hugo Franlink was a real person - however, there's absolutely nothing about him on Google, what can you say about this? Max Semenik (talk) 10:27, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]