Str8t arrow

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Nakon 21:23, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Please stop edit-warring and POV-pushing on Kelly Ayotte

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, you may be blocked from editing. You, and an IP with the identical POV, have repeatedly inserted into the bio an uncited statement about Ayotte's climate skepticism, "Ayotte does not offer any basis for her skepticism." Instead of discussing it on the talk page, your most recent edit summary is "Statement is accurate, factual and verifiable. Burden is on you to establish othe."[1] Wikipedia policy is that statements in articles must be verifiable, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true. All material in Wikipedia articles must be attributable to a reliable published source." If you want to expand on Ayotte's climate views, find a reliable source you can quote. Defend any contentious edits on the talk page. Stop edit-warring and pushing your POV or you and your IP will simply be banned from editing.betsythedevine (talk) 13:09, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

31 hour common vandalism sanction; using an ip to continue to Wikipedia:Edit war the inclusion of non sourced content is a violation of Wikipedia:Alternate account, and therefore vandalism. Repeated violations will likely result in longer blocks. LessHeard vanU (talk) 15:53, 6 November 2010 (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).

Str8t arrow (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I want all of my posts to Wikipedia removed immediately

Decline reason:

No reason given to unblock. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 19:13, 7 November 2010 (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 ask that Wikipedia immediately remove all of the posts made to the Kelly Ayotte entry and elsewhere in Wikipedia that have been made from my computer. This includes all postings from the following users:

24.61.105.116
66.30.51.57
Truthful Politics
Phases of the Moon
Lost in Statistics
str8t arrow

I do not not believe that either you nor BetsytheDevine have acted in good faith or in accordance with the spirit of Wikipedia. I don't want to get into an argument about what Wikipedia is and is not about and how the policies and guidelines are intended to be enforced. Therefore, I wish no longer to be involved in Wikipedia because it is clearly its administration is open to abuse.

The is easiest solution for me is to demand that Wikipedia remove all of my posts/edits and that is what I am doing. However, I can find no mechanism for doing that. Therefore, I will delete my posts my self, even though it very likely that other Wikipedia users will try promptly restore them and another dispute is likely to ensue.

I encourage you to re-familarize your self with these passages:

This pillar 5 of Wikipedia: "Wikipedia does not have firm rules. Rules on Wikipedia are not fixed in stone, and the spirit of the rule trumps the letter of the rule.Be bold in updating articles and do not worry about making mistakes. Your efforts do not need to be perfect" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars

"Wikipedia does not employ hard-and-fast rules, Wikipedia policy and guideline pages describe its principles and best-known practices. Policies explain and describe standards that all users should normally follow, while guidelines are meant to outline best practices for following those standards in specific contexts. Policies and guidelines should always be applied using reason and common sense." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Policies_and_guidelines

Before we can act on this, please clarify: Are all these user accounts and IP contributions by you, or by other people at your behest?  Sandstein  17:05, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Reply: they are all by me. I used different names in different browsers. I often couldn't remember what name I had previously selected so I frequently made up new names when I couldn't remember old ones.

The story behind behind my posts was that I as a voter in New Hampshire, was trying to figure out who the various candidates running for office were and what they stood for. In many cases, its is very difficult for voters like me to find out detailed information about candidates and their positions. The existing information on Wikipedia that I edited was skeletal and often irrelevant. I simply posted on Wikipedia what I discovered as I discovered it. Everything I posted is accurate and well document, well beyond the stand of most Wikipedia articles.

He left out User:Fertile Fields of Grain. All the same person. There's no reason to act on this request. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 19:25, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Reply: That could well be. I don't remeber the names that I selected. Please delete those posts as well. My request is to have all of my posts deleted and nothing more. I could care less about blocks. I just want out of Wikipedia.

And they are all editing the same few political articles. Sockpuppetry is blatent, block is justified, blanket edit deletion out of the question. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 19:29, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Reply: If sockpuppetry is blatant, as you claim, then you will put into effect my request to have all of my posts permanently deleted. My objective is to have all of my posts deleted from Wikipedia. I no longer wish to be involved with Wikipedia in any way and have completely lost respect for Wikipedia. If sockpuppetry is blatant, as you claim, you should be happy to delete all of my posts. If you don't delete my posts, I will. That is part of my withdrawal from involvement in Wikipedia.

Copyright problem: Hope Village Historic District

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Hope Village Historic District, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images from either web sites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from http://scituatelibrary.org/wp-content/uploads/scituate.pdf, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

• Have the author release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License (CC BY-SA 3.0) by leaving a message explaining the details at Talk:Hope Village Historic District and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure they quote the exact page name, Hope Village Historic District, in their email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If you hold the copyright to the work: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Hope Village Historic District. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0", or that the work is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:Hope Village Historic District with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

See Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template of the permissions letter the copyright holder is expected to send.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Hope Village Historic District saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:21, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

June 2019

Please do not remove the {{copyvio/core}} template from articles, as you did with Hope Village Historic District. Your action has been reverted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept non-free text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted, and removing copyright notices will not help your case. You can properly contest the deletion at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. If you are the owner of the material, you may release the material under the Creative Commons and GFDL licenses, as detailed at WP:IOWN. Alternatively, you are welcome to create a draft in your own words at Talk:Hope Village Historic District/Temp. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators and/or removers of the copyright notice templates may be blocked from editing. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:44, 23 June 2019 (UTC)