Blocked[edit]

This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived.

I have blocked you indefinitely because, in my opinion, you have not demonstrated sufficient competence to be editing Wikipedia. Your merging of userboxes based on a pseudo-guideline you created yourself is nothing short of disruptive and ample grounds for a block in and of itself, but your talk page is littered with people complaining about your edits. You have started drive-by RfCs on subjects you have no involvement in, RMs where you lack an understanding of the relevant policies and guidelines, a GA nomination for an article you've never edited, and all sorts of other tinkering with internal things that don't need to be changed and that you don't understand. Note that I started typing this before your reply at ANI, but that reply gives me no confidence that you understand the issues that multiple editors are raising with your edits and in fact suggests that you intend to continue making edits you've been told unequivocally are disruptive.

To be unblocked, you will need to convince the community that you understand the issues with your edits, that you are capable of editing in a way that is not disruptive and does not waste other editors' time, and that you intend to make unambiguously helpful edits (preferably to articles rather than internal processes). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:58, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[1] I have around 5.1% deleted edits. - Tbf69 🛈 🗩 10:16, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You seem to be confusing deleted edits with reverted edits. 'Deleted edits' just refers to edits that were deleted from the edit history, either because the entire page was deleted or because the edits were so inappropriate (or included PII) that they had to be censored. If you already knew this, I don't see how it might be relevant to this case that you have 5% deleted edits. – Popo Dameron talk 16:52, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Mr @PopoDameron! I'm sure you will find that most of my edits and new articles have been helpful. - Tbf69 🛈 🗩 16:56, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Block[edit]

This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived.

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).

Tbf69 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This block is inappropriate, considering that the "behaviour" which got me blocked is still under discussion. - Tbf69 🛈 🗩 10:07, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Decline reason:

Discussion appears to have reached a conclusion, even though it's still open. If the discussion ends up resolving in your favour, feel free to request an unblock. Yamla (talk) 10:55, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[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.

Second unblock request[edit]

This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived.

Tbf69 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand that my merges of duplicate userboxes, despite there being no guidance indicating it's not allowed, were disliked. I apologise. I've contributed a good fair amount to Wikipedia, and I have approximately 95% undeleted edits. (see [2]). I've reverted lots of vandalism, and created 39 mainspace pages (see [3]). - Tbf69 🛈 🗩 11:31, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Decline reason:

This is an inadequate request that does not properly address the full range of concerns mentioned at the still-ongoing ANI discussion. You've also misused this page to canvass editors to edit on your behalf, despite having been told not to do so. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:18, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

- Tbf69 🛈 🗩 11:31, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Yury Krapov[edit]

Hello, Tbf69. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Yury Krapov".

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. When 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:03, 18 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Saudi arabia railways logo.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Saudi arabia railways logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:51, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]