McCoolRedd

December 2020

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Adrian Peterson—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 14:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your help Materialscientist. It is much appreciated.McCoolRedd (talk) 16:21, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

McCoolRedd, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi McCoolRedd! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Nick Moyes (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, McCoolRedd, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Lap Dance (film) did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Introduction tutorial
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Simplified Manual of Style

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 need personal help ask me on my talk page, or . Again, welcome.  KNHaw ^(talk) 19:08, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

R.J. Atkins

Hi - just a note regarding the draft you're working on. I don't want to seem unfriendly or disparaging, but it might help you to read a few guidelines:

• WP:FIRST gives advice on writing your first article
• WP:NOTABILITY describes the concept of notability, which determines whether or not we host articles about particular subjects.
• WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR are the guidelines that this subject would be expected to meet.

Based on what's in the article right now, there is very little chance of the article being retained - you are going to need substantially better sourcing (look at WP:RS, WP:IS and WP:SECONDARY for more on this). As I say, I don't want to put you off - but I don't want you to waste your time either. Best GirthSummit _(blether) 15:57, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for yiur guidance... McCoolRedd (talk) 16:14, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: R.J. Atkins (December 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:R.J. Atkins and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:R.J. Atkins, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 16:52, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:2020visionintl per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/2020visionintl. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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 ~~~~}}.  GeneralNotability (talk) 22:34, 20 December 2020 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I am contributing in good faith and do not have any conflict of interest. McCoolRedd (talk) 23:15, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You have not addressed the reason for the block, sockpuppetry. You will need to explain how you came to make the edits you did to an obscure draft(which one has to know how to find). I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 23:25, 29 December 2020 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

The draft in question was found on another site that contains draft articles from Wikipedia. I used it to make my edits. I am a Houston-based freelance entertainment blogger and aspiring journalist. I was attempting to utilize Wikipedia as a platform for experience that will benefit me later. Please forgive my apparent ignorance, but I don't know how else to better explain myself. I am attempting in good faith to do so without coming off as condescending, rude, or arrogant. If there is more information I need to refer to in order to help me properly word my request to be unblocked, please direct me to it. McCoolRedd (talk) 23:35, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You copied WP:UPE editing from another site. This unfortunately means you were indeed violating WP:SOCK as well as WP:UPE and WP:COPYRIGHT. Yamla (talk) 15:11, 30 December 2020 (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.

In order for me to investigate, please point to the exact location where this draft article was published outside of Wikipedia. Additionally, please indicate why you thought it appropriate to copy content from another site in violation of copyright. --Yamla (talk) 12:08, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

The article is published at https://en.everybodywiki.com/R._J._Atkins. I found it via a Google search at https://www.google.com/search?gs_ssp=eJzj4tVP1zc0zDAtyCkzN802YPTiLMpSSCzJzswrBgBmMggP&q=rj+atkins&rlz=1CDGOYI_enUS819US819&oq=rj&aqs=chrome.2.69i60j69i57j46i39i395i410i424j69i60l3.3255j1j4&hl=en-US&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8. It is approximately the 7th or 8th search result about the person.

If there is such a thing, I'll say that my utilization of this content was an amateur mistake (not that it justifies or excuses it). I now totally understand that it was not appropriate of me to do so. The last thing I would ever want to do is jeopardize my integrity and should I be reinstated, I assure you that I will never copy anything from another site again.

McCoolRedd (talk) 15:01, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I'm not buying it. This doesn't explain why you are so interested in an actor who fails WP:NOTE. You are free to make a new unblock request but given the previous WP:UPE editing in this subject area, content which you copied yourself, I'm not comfortable advocating for your unblock. --Yamla (talk) 15:11, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Wow that was rather harsh to say. But then again it's pretty easy to criticize others when you're hiding behind a computer screen.

Perhaps I'm interested in the underdog and like to see those who people like you see as "failures" succeed.

Do I know R.J. personally? No I do not, but I've heard of him through a few Houston circles and think he has a rather intriguing story (and fought for this country), some of which cannot be published since you are so against original research. Is it a crime to take interest in a person who "fails?" Not at all, but if you'll do your own research, you'll discover they are the ones who usually become huge. Does the name Abraham Lincoln ring a bell?

I've screenshot our convo and I'll make sure that Mr. Atkins gets ahold of it. I hope he makes it as big as Denzel so he can rub egg in your faces?

Geez, I thought Wikipedia was supposed to be unbiased. Obviously, you're a failure too. I don't see you working for ABC News or a bigger platform but I will be someday and I'll make sure to refer back to how NOT to be belittle others. Thank you for revealing your true biased opinion. Good day. There's other sources than Wikipedia. McCoolRedd (talk) 15:32, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

December 2020

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

---

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

 331dot (talk) 16:18, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Since you are doing what you say others are doing to you, despite the civil discourse with you, I have removed your talk page access. 331dot (talk) 16:19, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

See also the discussion over on my talk page. This should strongly count against any future unblock request. --Yamla (talk) 14:39, 31 December 2020 (UTC)