User talk:DestinationFearFan

Here's wishing you a welcome back to Wikipedia, DestinationFearFan. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

If you don't already know, you should sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to insert your username and the date.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:52, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:China National Heavy Duty Truck Group § "Homan, previously called Folor". ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:19, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded there. DestinationFearFan (talk) 15:44, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for knowingly (Special:Diff/1012650562) continuing to add unreliably sourced content and/or original research to articles after a block for the same behavior.

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 ~~~~}}.  ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:08, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I feel a bit guilty for having removed the original block earlier than needed; I should perhaps have insisted on the month-long pause. On the other hand, I'm afraid that a month doesn't make the necessary difference either. If I correctly understand the situation, the fundamental issue is a basic understanding of what people are writing, combined with a lack of understanding of the reason behind such messages. Special:Diff/1008891449, quickly self-reverted, was a question in response to its own answer and might be a good example of the problem. Getting a message across is admittedly harder via text than in an audiovisual conversation, but:

• When you had been blocked the first time, you evaded the block by editing while logged out (Special:Diff/1009702230/1009704033), understanding that you had been blocked, but not why blocks exist at all.
• When you added Special:Diff/1012506944 to the article China National Heavy Duty Truck Group, you knew you were citing an unreliable source (see block reason), and you repeated my explanation from Special:Diff/1008904423. However, this knowledge did not stop you from adding the information. It only stopped you from providing a citation. You understood why the source is unreliable, but not why Wikipedia uses a concept of "reliability" at all.

This situation is currently sadly incompatible with continuing to edit the encyclopedia.

If you have questions about the block or reliability, do feel free to ask ({{ping|ToBeFree}} insert question here ~~~~).

If you believe that the block should be removed, please have a look at Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks before creating an unblock request. There is no time limit for doing so, and – as the previous early unblock led to this result – I personally believe you shouldn't do so in the next few months, as the situation is unlikely to have changed by then.

The block only applies to the English Wikipedia and you are welcome (perhaps even encouraged by WP:SO) to edit other Wikimedia projects with more care. See meta:Table of Wikimedia projects for a huge list.

You may not edit the English Wikipedia with any other account or while logged out.

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:44, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree: And that was exactly why I didn't cite the source! And also, that comment you left: it said nothing about not using that source. You never told me that the source was not suitable for Wikipedia. So again, your reason of me citing an unrealible source is not true at all. Look at that article. Did I cite it? Plus, that was your own fault for unblocking me sooner than it was. When I was blocked, I was going through every single source citing and reliability article on Wikipedia, so I would've figured it out eventually.DestinationFearFan (talk) 22:08, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't cite the source because you were aware about its unreliability, yet you decided to use it without attribution. I even addressed this exact source in Special:Diff/1008904423, and if that wasn't enough, in Special:Diff/1008920696. You had been asked not to use unreliable sources for Wikipedia statements multiple times by other users before, such as in Special:Diff/1007770341 and Special:Diff/1006195968. Even now that this behavior has led to a second block, you're complaining about never having been told... what exactly? What kind of information should we have provided before the block? Was there really anything you could have been told to prevent this from happening?

Edit conflict regarding Special:Diff/1012714284, if I understand correctly, you as the currently blocked person are complaining about your previous unblock and the current re-block at the same time. I have not had that happen in a block discussion yet and I think it makes no sense. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:29, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree: Alright, let me explain a little about that source. Before you messaged me on my talk page about not using the source, I went to that website, and typed every single car brand it listed onto my userpage, under "pages to create". I already had used it before anyone had said not to. That's why I didn't cite it, because I understood that it was now unreliable, per your message. DestinationFearFan (talk) 15:28, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree: Can you please look at my message. I am responding of why I did this. DestinationFearFan (talk) 15:28, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DestinationFearFan, Special:Diff/1013611523 didn't cause a ping because it didn't add a full new signature to the page. If you would like to make sure that a ping happens, the edit summary is the easiest way to do so. A wikilink to any user page in an edit summary will ping the user.

I had seen the original message and chose not to respond for now, as I can't provide helpful advice beyond what was already written. To re-summarize the central point of my arguments, I believe that the block is currently necessary to prevent disruption, and that this need won't quickly disappear. It may take multiple years until you completely see what has happened here, and after these years, you'll be happily welcomed back to the encyclopedia.

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:18, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Zedriv is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zedriv until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Sliekid (talk) 12:49, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sliekid: Is nominating an article I created just because Homan/Folor wasn't reliable necessary? Could you give me more details why exactly it is "non-notable company"? DestinationFearFan (talk) 15:53, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Yulu (marque) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yulu (marque) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Sliekid (talk) 12:50, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sliekid: Is nominating an article I created just because Homan/Folor wasn't reliable necessary? Could you give me more details why exactly it is "non-notable company"? DestinationFearFan (talk) 15:54, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DestinationFearFan. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Toyota Campmate, 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) 20:05, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DestinationFearFan. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Toyota Camp Mate, 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) 20:05, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DestinationFearFan. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Queens of Renthia, 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) 23:03, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DestinationFearFan. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Toyota Campmate".

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:59, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DestinationFearFan. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Toyota Camp Mate".

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:00, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DestinationFearFan. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Queens of Renthia".

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:39, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DestinationFearFan, and welcome to Wikipedia. I edit here too, under the username Shushugah, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Keyton, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keyton.

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not votes. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Shushugah}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 12:16, 27 September 2023 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I've stepped away from this site for two years now. During this time, I've taken some time to reflect on the mistakes I made on this site. Not only did I blatantly disregard the warnings I received from admins, I admit I went "overboard" in my eagerness to create pages on this site. I ignored the sourcing principles that had to be followed, and continued to misunderstand the definition and examples of reliable sources. During this time I've been blocked, I've reviewed other pages and forums that are written about topics that I tried to create here. And on those pages, I clearly noticed the difference in quality between my sources and their professional sources. Prehaps, if I took the time to research more, I would have been able to avoid being banned, or creating unprofessional articles in the first place. I understand the blocked admins concern about me reverting edits, and I admit that I did not fully utilize the provided resources to understand the terminologies used. In conclusion, my decision to rashly edit articles and ignore the admins warnings fully contribute to my harmful edits and ban, which in hindsight, I realize was needed for me to reacess. And so, I ask humbly, if it is time for me to return to this wiki. I see great potential for me to add my passion of the automotive industry to this wiki, along with new insights that will help me succeed if granted another chance. DestinationFearFan (talk) 04:10, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This unblock request has been declined due to your history of vandalism and/or disruption to this encyclopedia. However, we are willing to give you another chance provided that you can earn back the trust of the Wikipedia community. To be unblocked you need to demonstrate and confirm that you are willing and able to contribute positively to Wikipedia. You can do this by:

• Familiarizing yourself with our basic rules.
• Reading our guide to improving articles.
• Picking any pre-existing article you wish to improve.
  • If you have trouble choosing an article to improve, see this index of articles needing improvement for ideas.

Once you have decided on the article you will propose improvements to:

• 1. Click the Edit tab at the top of that article;
  2. Copy the portion of the prose from that article that you will be proposing changes to. However:
     • do not copy the "infobox" from the start of the article (i.e., markup like this: {{infobox name|...}}),
     • do not copy any image placement code (i.e., markup like this: [[File:Name.jpg|thumb|caption]]),
     • do not copy the page's categories from the bottom of the page (i.e., markup like this: [[Category:Name]]),
     • and do not copy the stub tag (if there) from the bottom of the page (i.e., markup like this: {{Foo stub}});
  3. Click edit at your talk page and paste at the bottom under a new section header (like this: == [[Article title]] ==) the copied content but do not save yet;
  4. Place your cursor in the edit summary box and paste there an edit summary in the following form which specifies the name of the article you copied from and links to it (this is required for mandatory copyright attribution): "Copied content from [[exact Name of Article]]; see that article's history for attribution."
  5. You can now save the page. However, if your edits have any citations to reliable sources (which they should), add the following template to the end of your prose: {{reflist-talk}}. Once you have added the template, click Publish changes.
• Now, edit that content. Propose significant and well researched improvements by editing the selected portion of the article. Please note that we are not looking for basic typo corrections, or small unreferenced additions; your edits should be substantial, and reflect relevant policies.
• When you are done with your work, re-request unblocking using {{unblock}} and an administrator will review your proposed edits.
  • If we (including the original blocking admin) are convinced that your proposed edits will hopefully improve Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, you will be unblocked.

If you need help while working with your proposed edits, you may add "{{Help me|your question here ~~~~}}" to your talk page. Thank you. Yamla (talk) 20:39, 12 December 2023 (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.