Leslie Roak

August 2009

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for attempting to harass other users. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Dougweller (talk) 16:41, 14 August 2009 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Hi. I just wanted to tell whom it may concern that I have not been harassing other users, just replying to their comments. AniMate has been constantly threatening me and harassing me. I hope I made myself clear. I will provide further evidence

Decline reason:

You are not showing that you have any knowledge of why you were blocked, what policies you have violated, and how you will contribute to the project. I suggest you spend the remainder of the duration of the block (which is quite short, in my view) looking over the discussions above and deciding how you will improve Wikipedia. I assure you this cannot include insulting or harassing other editors.  Frank  |  talk  18:20, 14 August 2009 (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.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I just wanted to let you know that as long as I don't get harassed by Animate (who is also TAnthony) I will not speak to them. Plus, most of my edits have really improved the GH articles and some Days articles

Decline reason:

Again, you are not acknowledging the reasons behind this temporary suspension of your editing privileges. Furthermore, AniMate and TAnthony are two different people - please do not make false accusations of sockpuppetry. If you are going to contribute to Wikipedia, you have to work with people. Pastor Theo (talk) 19:14, 14 August 2009 (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.

I tried. I even called a truce between me and AniMate. TAnthony agreed but AniMate refused to answer back and began acting all possessive of Carly Corinthos article and started making dramatic edits. --Leslie Roak (talk) 19:47, 14 August 2009 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Please note that Animate and TAnthony are harassing me. Why shouldn't I respond back to them? THeyre also tag teaming against me. Wikipedia - A Free encyclopedia that only AniMate can edit

Decline reason:

This is the sort of thing that got you blocked. I'm blocking your other account for block evasion now. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:07, 14 August 2009 (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.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I am a hardworking editor. Proof? Please see Robin Scorpio, Claudia Corinthos, Jason Morgan, [{Sam McCall]], Sami Brady, and mostly Michael Corinthos. I am telling you that I am not Randy or any of those other accounts, except User:Leslie Roaker II ( a public sock). I hadn't known about block evasion, like TAnthony said and I'm sorry that some are offended by my personal attacks (which was a reaction to the accusation). Please unblock me otherwise I'm leaving forever.

Decline reason:

There are way too many coincidences for anyone to believe that those other accounts are not yours. They edit in similar topics, there are instances of using one account to edit another accounts' comments, and they all share an IP address or other technical information that led to the positive Checkuser finding. We thank you for your good contributions. The standard deal in a case like this is that you will need to wait several months without editing at all, no new or alternate accounts. After that, you would need to post a new request and agree to only one account. The long time is necessary; without that, no admin can rely on your promise. I'm sorry if this means you abandon the project but you aren't being honest about these other accounts and as a result, trust between you and the community has been deeply damaged. Mangojuice^talk 19:29, 17 August 2009 (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.

File source problem with File:CarlyandLorenzo.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:CarlyandLorenzo.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:34, 3 September 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 16:34, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:KateHoward-MeganWard.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:KateHoward-MeganWard.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:49, 27 September 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 14:49, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Sami422007.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sami422007.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:54, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of List of miscellaneous General Hospital characters for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of miscellaneous General Hospital characters 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/List of miscellaneous General Hospital characters until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. Anthem of joy (talk) 15:36, 11 May 2011 (UTC)