Kalebrocks318

Images on Newark buildings page

I love the updates you've put into the List of tallest buildings in Newark page, but when you do images, try to keep conformity with the rest of the page. Assuming you're using visual editor, when you add an image, click "Advance" in the image settings, set the "Image Type" from thumbnail to basic, and then change the "Image Size" to custom, and make the left box 100 x XXX px. It will help keep the page clean. Thanks! Hij802 (talk) 20:57, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately the images used have lifted from developers websites and other sources, despite the claim that the ‘own work’ of of the downloader. They are not and therefore violate both Wikimedia Commons and Wikipedia copyright rules; they are not legally usable without permission of person/agency that originally made them (or whomever holds copyright. Sorry, just the way it is!Djflem (talk) 18:03, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Please see: Wikipedia:Image use policy. Djflem (talk) 07:22, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

References

If you have access to files, sources, diagrams, municipal meeting minutes, etc, please add them to ‘tallest buildings in Newark’ either as references or external links or on the talk page. Information needs to be verifiable. Thanks. Djflem (talk) 18:07, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Iconic 777

At List of tallest buildings in Newark: Based on available references and the building’s own website: NEARLY 400 feet. Can you find provide references for anything different? Until such time we have to go with what we have. Visually makes sense in comparison to adjacent Gateway I and II as does calculation of 33x11=363. But both those things are ‘original research’. It does seem building is indeed 369 feet, but we have nothing confirming that. There’s this, so if can access planning board files please do: https://www.reddit.com/r/Newark/comments/182udwv/list_of_tallest_buildings_in_newark/o

Rank	Name	image	Height ft / m	Floors	Year	Notes
3	Iconiq 777		369 ft (112 m)	33	2022	Beyer Blinder Belle Boraie in partnership with Shaquille O'Neal

Would be good to get it right, but w/o verifiable sources (Emporis is old estimate), it’s tough. Thanks Djflem (talk) 18:22, 27 December 2023 (UTC) Djflem (talk) 18:22, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Sounds like someone has got to bust out the tape measure and get a building sized ladder Hij802 (talk) 04:04, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Gods what is wrong with you. I hope you know that 777 is not 400 feet. It’s not even taller than the prudential plaza building. Anyone with eyes can see that when you’re looking at the tower. I actually have the architectural plans and the height of the tower is 369ft. I don’t care what website you used, I get my info from the Central Planning Board of Newark who post all new construction projects documents and architectural plans. When I change it and put the correct height don’t touch it. Kalebrocks318 (talk) 04:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

I attend every planning board meeting when Newark has towers like these so I can get the height from the source and not by some article or website. I can show you where to look for the information anytime friend. Kalebrocks318 (talk) 04:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kalebrocks318: This one? https://www.reddit.com/r/Newark/s/JsSHSqGwhP. Looks good but as a source, now you now know, not really usable as a citable reference. So where does one look for the information? What are the links?.22:05, 19 January 2024 (UTC) Djflem (talk) 22:05, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

References

• https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-233034.html
• https://www.reddit.com/r/Newark/comments/s9qqva/777_mccarter_highway_construction_update/
• https://www.skyscrapercitycom/threads/newark-downtown-777-mccarter-highway-35-fl-t-o.2078431/
• https://forum.newyorkyimby.com/t/newark-777-mccarter-hwy-shaq-tower-2-ft-33-floors/4479/5

January 2024

{{unblock| This is my first time dealing with a situation like this. I never pictured myself fighting to stay within a community. I am no sockpuppet, I only have one account on wiki, and the other know account Ive made years ago is lost due to forgotten password. I respect Wikipedia guidelines and rules ensure a safe space of creating beautiful work to better knowledge the human race. Tallest buildings in Newark may not be important to the everyday user but it’s important to me, I saw that I had opportunity to add what I’ve been working on for years with Newark new growth in construction. I just want to apologize again, and I pray that I can be forgive, Jesus died on the cross for sins we created, terrible sins, my lord and savior can forgive and I know you can too. I know if given a second chance I would prove myself worthy of being in this community. If not then it’s been an honor, updating the page and being part of something bigger than me, and I would hope my contributions would be deemed useful and worthy enough to remain on the page. Once again I sincerely apologize, for the misunderstanding I only have one account and will keep this account, ban or no ban I will keep this account. Kalebrocks318 (talk) 23:04, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

{{Unblock| Good day, after great analysis and hours of reflection, I've finally identified my blunders and mistakes. I can confidently state that I have learned my lessons. Yes, I submitted photographs and modified material without a solid source to support them. I knew I was doing something incorrect, but I didn't know how to submit the sources I had. Other members of the Newark Tallest Buildings Wiki page helped me understand how to handle updates and contributions to the form. If unblock I promise to learn from my mistakes and not commit them again, if I want to edit anything or upload anything I will make sure I have the proper links to back them up, I will also ask for guidance from other members whenever I feel I am missing something or making the same mistake again. My intentions were pure but the way I handled it was wrong and once again I apologize. No more copyright images, no more changing information without the proper links or sorts to justify the changes to help make my contributions useful instead of useless and problematic. Finally, I'd want to clarify that I only have one wiki account; yes, I and @Getmedown made similar adjustments, but I assure you that is not me. But just because we made comparable adjustments does not imply that we are the same person. I assume the individual was a user on the Newark Reddit page who wanted to change the height of 777 McCarter Highway, but I promise to everything I believe in that I only have one account. I'm working hard to reclaim my account, not someone else's that I didn't even know or heard of before the ban. Kalebrocks318 (talk) 20:15, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

{{Unblock|Good day, after great analysis and hours of reflection, I've finally identified my blunders and mistakes. I can confidently state that I have learned the reasons behind my ban. I am no sockpuppet. Thisban is because of the sockpuppet suspicions, and I am strongly opposed that I have two accounts. For being a sockpuppet I am innocent. Finally, I'd want to clarify that I only have one wiki account; yes, I and @Getmedown made similar adjustments, but I assure you that is not me. But just because we made comparable adjustments does not imply that we are the same person. I assume the individual was a user on the Newark Reddit page who wanted to change the height of 777 McCarter Highway, but I promise to everything I believe in that I only have one account. I'm working hard to reclaim my account, not someone else's that I didn't even know or heard of until the ban, and @Djflem messages explaining what my ban is actually for. There was someone on Reddit a friend who provided a picture of 777 McCarter hwy floor plan height lay out. I am not sure if he made his own account to go ahead and change the height himself. I am no sockpuppet and would never make two accounts to keep my contributions or edits the same. I hope you can finally believe me and unblock my account I would be extremely grateful for it. Moving forward I will try my best to make sure that these allegations don’t happen again. Kalebrocks318 (talk) 18:29, 20 January 2024 (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).

Kalebrocks318 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Your reason here, good evening my name is Kaleb Jackson. I saw that my wiki account has been blocked. I am not sure for what reasons I was blocked but whatever it was I just want to apologize and take full accountability for my actions. I love the city of Newark NJ, and for years the world has tried to keep Newark gems secret and hide important information. On Newarks tallest building page I took the opportunity to give wiki the accurate information for the buildings on the list. This morning I worked hard to give 777 McCarter hwy the correct height information and finding the correct sources to back it up. If I overstepped my boundaries I am sorry, the last thing I want to do is cause harm and disruption to this amazing community.

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 22:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

---

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.

@Bbb23: @Getmedown: @Yamla: @Kalebrocks318:

Over the years I havemonitored & maintained the article List of tallest buildings in Newark. In the last 10 years the city has experienced a residential building boom, accelerated now to include a high-rise projects that would qualify for inclusion. Construction is is being followed enthusiastically at user-generated forums such as Reddit, SkyscraperPage, SkyscraperCity, & YIMBY. Afficiandos have taken an interest in updating and expanding the Wikipedia article. While appreciated, their of knowledge about "how Wikipedia works" is lacking and attempts to inform them about verifiability (citing reliable refs) and copyright restrictions have been met with some resistance and frustration. Among the so-called "newbies" is User talk:Kalebrocks318, who has made some very worthy contributions, and whom I believe has learned to operate within "Wikipedia way" of doing things. (His above response to the block is certainly a testimony to his passion for the subject and respect for the enyclopedia). My interaction and observation do not lead me to believe that User talk:Getmedown is his sockpuppet. There have been others (such as as User:Hij802 and User 68.195.10.222) who've been part of the flurry of the activity since November. I do not know if my insinuation of sockpuppetry on Getmedown's page precipitated a block and I regret making it in the heat of the moment. I know that that user has vigorously contested it, whereas to date Kalebrocks318 has not. I therefore request that you more deeply look into the matter to keep the good faith and because we shouldn't bite the newcomers. Thanks. Djflem (talk) 15:16, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

On the other hand when I see his bragging (so cool to be cool on Reddit) one thinks indeed he has used a sockpuppet. Djflem (talk) 22:31, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

I don’t know what I am supposedly bragging about just taking ownership of my contribution. If I offended anyone I apologize but I did not use a sockpuppet and didn’t even know what one was until yesterday. You can agree and stand with me then go back on your words based off a text on another app. If that’s how the wiki community acts and treats newcomers then maybe blocking me was the right decision. This isn’t how you treat newcomers especially those as young as me. I just wanted to be part of something special and make a difference even if it’s on a wiki page but at least the information is right. Sitting in 6 hours plus planning board meetings just to let the community know how tall this building is or if it got approved or not. It’s okay to be happy and brag about hard work when it finally pays off. Kalebrocks318 (talk) 22:54, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Well, actually you did NOT contribute the somewhat usable reference for verification. User talk:Getmedown did on his talk page. Are you claiming ownership of that? You certainly, after two months of editing here, should have learned that to contribute to Wikipedia there's a standard: provide veriable information using reliable sources that are properly cited. You had plenty of opportunity to do so, but chose not to. Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth is how it works here, whether anyone likes it or not. (There is no disagreement about the height of Iqonic777). Your claims, age or time spent in planning board meetings does not change the fact. Your commitment to the subject is admirable and your continued contributions would have been welcome, but your inability or unwillingness (spiced with self-righteousness and self-pity) to "get it" and "work within Wikipedia procedures" stand in your way. I was trying to help you out here, and support you in a serious "unblock request" (which is described above), and might still if you make one, but the attitude/approach to editing here needs to change. You may want to consider contacting Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat so they can update their database and provide a useful statistics that have been vetted by professionals and upgrade the Newark page and to better understand and practice the rigor with which statistics must be proven. If you are serious about getting correct information out into the world (beyond user-generated gossip forums like Reddit, you'll have to do better. Djflem (talk) 08:39, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

It really is a shame. They caught up with you at Wikimedia Commons, too. If any of those images are actually pictures you've taken, you may want to salvage it that effort.https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Uploads_by_User:Kalebrocks318 Djflem (talk) 17:23, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

I feel bad, and I think this ban is a bit extreme. I’m the one who saw how bad the Newark page was in comparison to the Jersey City page, so I edited it to meet the standards of that page. I had utilized some of Kale’s information he posted on Reddit because it was very helpful and he seemed to have dedicated his account on their to posting about buildings in Newark. Then he posted that someone updated the Wiki page, and then I told him it was me and encouraged him to contribute.

I know we’ve told him multiple times to use sources and not copyrighted images, but I do believe that, after this, he has certainly learned his lesson about it.

He does have legitimate sources of information on building heights - the problem is that often they are in the form of an image or screenshot of plans or a meeting. I know Wikipedia cares more about verification than anything, is it possible he could upload those images somewhere to make them count as useable sources? I’m not sure how he could contact the Council website to update their info. Hij802 (talk) 17:53, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

You have been blocked because of sockpuppetry it appears you and User talk:Getmedown are the same person. It's would be wise to identify that you are not, if you're not, even if your edits about 777 McCarter height were were similar. (My observation is that you use Kalebxtentacion and that he uses Badsquatch 27 at that site.) Believe you need to address that accusation in your block request. Djflem (talk) 20:06, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Ohhhh, okay now I understand. Yeah I don’t know who Usertalk:Getmedown is. That’s definitely not me, it could be someone else from Reddit but as for me I only have one wiki account. The only other known account I have is from a long time ago but my username was not Getmedown. Usertalk:Djflem I have only one account, I don’t have two accounts only one. Kalebrocks318 (talk) 20:09, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Well, you need to say that IN your unblock request! Djflem (talk) 21:42, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

You have edit and say that your unblock request and say that in it to address the suspicion!!! (You did say it was a friend who gave you the drawings, which is not a problem. Seems like that was that Badsquatch 27 from Reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/Newark/s/JsSHSqGwhP you were talking to about the 'fools at Wikipedia'Djflem (talk) 21:54, 19 January 2024 (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).

Kalebrocks318 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Good day, after great analysis and hours of reflection, I've finally identified my blunders and mistakes. I can confidently state that I have learned my lessons. Yes, I submitted photographs and modified material without a solid source to support them. I knew I was doing something incorrect, but I didn't know how to submit the sources I had. Other members of the Newark Tallest Buildings Wiki page helped me understand how to handle updates and contributions to the form. If unblock I promise to learn from my mistakes and not commit them again, if I want to edit anything or upload anything I will make sure I have the proper links to back them up, I will also ask for guidance from other members whenever I feel I am missing something or making the same mistake again. My intentions were pure but the way I handled it was wrong and once again I apologize. No more copyright images, no more changing information without the proper links or sorts to justify the changes to help make my contributions useful instead of useless and problematic. Kalebrocks318 (talk) 1:54 pm, Yesterday (UTC−5)

Decline reason:

That's nice, but you have not addressed the WP:SOCK, and it looks like you've been coordinating edits via Reddit. Please address those concerns. Thanks-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:40, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

---

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.