User talk:Ellidon217

Please click here to add a new message!

Welcome!

Hello, Ellidon217, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

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 help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:19, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seneca Ridge Middle School

Please see this deletion discussion. There is long standing precedent and consensus that schools below secondary level are redirected to the school district authority that operates them, see WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. Please do not restore the article unless you can provide a source demonstrating a clear claim to notability. Polyamorph (talk) 18:29, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You need to stop restoring this article, on a non-notable school, against consensus at this deletion discussion. Polyamorph (talk) 14:51, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

November 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain pages (Seneca Ridge Middle School) for edit warring.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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) 20:20, 29 November 2021 (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).

Ellidon217 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am sorry, I promise I will not do it again. I did not know I had to discuss controversial changes first. Ellison Blindonsa 17:43, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

As noted below, there is no reason for you to be editing the redirect page you edit warred on, so there is no need to lift the block. Middle schools do not merit articles in most cases. You may edit the rest of the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 22:53, 30 November 2021 (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.

The block is limited to the Seneca Ridge Middle School page only. There is no reason you should ever need to edit this page, so the block will not affect your ability to contribute constructively elsewhere. Polyamorph (talk) 22:05, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. Girth Summit _(blether) 13:19, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since you have attempted to evade the block which prevented you from editing that page, by recreating the page you want to exist at a different title, I have blocked you from editing entirely. Girth Summit _(blether) 13:22, 10 December 2021 (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).

Ellidon217 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am sorry, I will stop with that now, I just think we need to have a new debate on that page since it was 10 years ago. Ellison Blindonsa 14:50, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Not only does your response demonstrate a lack of understanding about what Wikipedia is for and how it works, but the edit that Girth Summit mentioned was a particularly flagrant act of misconduct. I no longer feel inclined to assume good faith and even consider an unblock with topic-ban restrictions; I feel that what benefits the encyclopedia most is for you to remain blocked. —C.Fred (talk) 18:54, 10 December 2021 (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.

I am trying to get a feel for how well you understand Wikipedia policies as I evaluate your request. Why do you think that Seneca Ridge is so exceptional that it should have an article about it? What makes it so unique? Where has it received significant coverage in non-local reliable sources? —C.Fred (talk) 15:05, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

C.Fred - just a heads up while you are evaluating this user's capacity to avoid being disruptive: please note the history of this talk page, particularly the changes they made to an administrator's response to an earlier unblock request. Best Girth Summit _(blether) 15:12, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Prior to their first block, they also removed oldAfD templates from the talk page. They haven't understood why they were blocked and have shown no intention to edit constructively moving forward. Polyamorph (talk) 18:24, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It has recieved coverage in local sources and I just think that anyone should be able to see more information about it on Wikipedia if they want to. It is about sharing knowledge, so I think the page is perfectly reasonable -Ellidon 217

You have not provided any reliable third party sources to demonstrate notability. You were blocked from editing the page, after edit warring with several long term trusted users. You were welcome to edit constructively elsewhere but appear unwilling to do so and instead want to return to the same activity that got you blocked. Polyamorph (talk) 18:13, 10 December 2021 (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).

Ellidon217 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please just unblock me I promise I won't do it again Ellison Blindonsa 20:32, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

At this point your promise isn't worth much, honestly. (And this was your third request. I could have revoked your talk page access but chose not to. However, if you make another request that doesn't really show that you've reflected on why you do what you do wrong and how you're going to avoid doing that in the future, I would recommend to any admin reviewing it that your access be revoked because neither you nor us would be using our time productively. — Daniel Case (talk) 18:29, 11 December 2021 (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.

If you change the wording in a block message, declined unblock message, or any other message on this page, you will also lose your ability to edit this talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 20:38, 10 December 2021 (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).

Ellidon217 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello, I have taken 2 months away to reflect and really just to understand why my edit warring was wrong. I acknowledge that Seneca Ridge MS does not need it's own page, and that I will stop edit warring if I am unblocked. If I am unblocked, I will forget about this issue, and I will make constructive edits. Ellison Blindonsa 19:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You don't describe the constructive edits that you will make- and that is now only one aspect of the block. It is difficult to trust that you will not alter the comments of others when it suits you. I think your only pathway back to editing is the standard offer, which requires a six month wait. 331dot (talk) 10:29, 3 February 2022 (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.

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).

Ellidon217 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello, I have taken 2 months away to reflect and really just to understand why my edit warring was wrong. I acknowledge that Seneca Ridge MS does not need it's own page, and that I will stop edit warring if I am unblocked. If I am unblocked, I will forget about this issue, and I will make constructive edits. I promise, if I am unblocked, to not edit other's comments on my talk page, or unblock acceptance/decline. The constructive edits I will make involve references, to help make pages better, to help give people around the world information, not misinformation. I will not edit Seneca Ridge MS Page ever again, unless another discussion is held.14:20, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Two months? It is less than one day since your last request. If you are not prepared to take the standard offer, I see no reason in continuing this any further. Talk page access revoked. — Voice of Clam 10:30, 5 February 2022 (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.

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 for being 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.

— Voice of Clam 10:30, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To any other admins, I did not read the date and this page correctly, that is why I initially restored TPA and took it back. 331dot (talk) 16:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: As info I have blocked an IP claiming to be this user after a disruptive edit today. Not as a checkuser, just based on self-admission. -- ferret (talk) 16:03, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Likely block evasion as BE172-08. --Yamla (talk) 21:14, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

Despite a UTRS pledge in February of 2022 to "...completely ignore the page I was edit warring on Seneca Ridge Middle School and I will never try to edit that page again," this user has created two accounts this month, User_talk:BE172-08 and User_talk:Breellis178 which were blocked after failing to ignore that (now protected) page. Ellidon217 has been advised to drop concurrent unblock requests on those pages. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:48, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #74227

@Girth Summit, Voice of Clam, and 331dot: Restoring TPA for unblock discussion. Will need WP:TBAN/ partial block of Seneca Ridge Middle School. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:45, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to assume I can make the offer here. I will essentially copy-paste my UTRS appeal with some edits. Ellidon217 (talk) 15:40, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra

Thank you for restoring TPA. Can I still make the standard offer, or do I have to wait another 2 months? Ellison Blindonsa 13:38, 1 June 2023 (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).

Ellidon217 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Reviewing Administrators, I have taken a 6-month break from editing Wikipedia,and I realize the error of my ways from before. I should not have sockpuppeted, and I especially should not have done the disruptive edit warring with the Seneca Ridge Middle School page which led to me being blocked and sockpuppeting in the first place. In addition, I should not have then lied on my sockpuppets claiming that they were not sockpuppets. I now can do much more constructive editing, such as copyedits, adding sources, updating outdated information, preventing vandalism, participating in discussions, etc. I only sockpuppeted because I thought that I had no chance of showing that I could be a constructive editor since I have done Standard Offers before and they had been declined. I promise that if I am unblocked, I will never do any form of sockpuppetry again, and I will be a constructive editor who improves upon Wikipedia. I would like to put my history of sockpuppetry and edit warring behind me, and continue to a new future. Feel free to ask me questions regarding this unblock. In addition, I would accept a ban from editing the page Seneca Ridge Middle School. I would like to have a unblock discussion :) Ellidon217 (talk) 15:45, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I'm declining here. I have a GREAT deal of concern with the unblock request for User:WP-POLICYIDIDNTKNOW. In that unblock request, they claimed that this was a sock of your account. Below, you say that you support their unblock request as "all the claims are valid" and there were "false sockpuppet allegations" against them. One of the claims they made was to admit that this was a sock account of their account. I'm sorry but this just doesn't sit right with me. RickinBaltimore (talk) 11:59, 2 June 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.

You should modify your unblock request to note your planned topic ban and to address your deliberate lies with your other accounts. You worked hard to destroy the community's trust in you and now need to work to get it back. --Yamla (talk) 15:52, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, will do. Ellidon217 (talk) 15:54, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see your acceptance of the WP:TBAN from Seneca Ridge Middle School on the UTRS ticket. Please accept on your talk page.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:56, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have Ellidon217 (talk) 15:57, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

" In addition, I would accept a ban from editing the page Seneca Ridge Middle School." Ellidon217 (talk) 15:57, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As you are seeking unblock here, the UTRS ticket has been expired. All unblock discussion must be here. Best -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:58, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. Ellidon217 (talk) 15:59, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Any further feedback regarding my unblock request? Ellidon217 (talk) 15:59, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Ellidon217 (talk) 15:56, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding WP:POLICYIDIDNOTKNOW

All Administrators, @Yamla@Deepfriedokra@Spicy@Ponyo@Girth Summit@Voice of Clam@331dot@ToBeFree

I have become aware through a notification that User:WP-POLICYIDIDNTKNOW has requested to be unblocked. Even though I know that you do not trust me, I must tell you that both me and them know that they are not my sockpuppet. All of the arguments that they made in their unblock request are quite valid, and I do support them. In addition, I do not wish for the false sockpuppet allegations against them to negatively affect the current unblock request process I am going through. I ask that you consider their request, and that you assume good faith and do not directly connect them to me.

Best, Ellidon217 (talk) 01:54, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You support an editor who you claim is unrelated to you, even though they state that they are? [1] Sorry, I don't buy it, though I will leave it up to another admin to review your request. — Voice of Clam (talk) 11:00, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Voice of Clam They are not stating that they are related to me, they are just saying that admins have claimed that they are related to me. What they seem to be saying there is that they have done research into me and my sockpuppets and they found some patterns that they do not believe are present in their account. In addition, I am greatly upset that they decided to apply for unblock around the same time as me, as they have messed up my request for unblocking. What would I need to add to another unblock request in order for it to succeed? I certainly do not wish to wait another 6 months, as I have already been blocked for 1 1/2 Years! Ellidon217 (talk) 13:19, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ellidon217, are you fluent in any other language than English? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:45, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not. I have very limited knowledge of Spanish and Arabic, but other than that I am not knowledgeable in any non-English languages.

Ellidon217 (talk) 18:59, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, that's tough. I'd have recommended editing a different language's Wikipedia for a while else. But perhaps one of the other English Wikimedia projects, such as the Wiktionary or the Simple English Wikipedia is an option. Joining a different project is surely less frustrating than requesting an unblock here, and productive contributions there are something you could point to in a later appeal.

With 85 contributions so far, I'm afraid that your main reason for requesting an unblock is a general desire to not be blocked, not a deeply felt desire to edit Wikipedia a lot. You could prove me wrong by becoming an active, trusted contributor to a similar project. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:00, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree, if you look at the contributions of my sockpuppet, User:DHSchool2003Student then you can actually find some pretty constructive edits. In fact, all of the edits I made there were constructive. I was approaching 500 contributions within about 2 months of editing. I did everything from anti-vandalism to copyediting to adding sources to expanding pages. Ellidon217 (talk) 02:33, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I was hoping that that sockpuppetry would go unnoticed so I would not be blocked and could actually have a constructive Wikipedia account, but alas. Ellidon217 (talk) 02:35, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ToBeFree In addition, Wikimedia, which I would love to edit on, is banned from my school computer for some reason :( Ellidon217 (talk) 13:35, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's nothing we can fix though :/ ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:36, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In any case, I have proven that I actually want to make constructive edits to Wikipedia through my sockpuppet account, User:DHSchool2003Student. I know that it sounds strange to use a sockpuppet as a reference to the fact that I am here to build an encyclopedia, but that is kind of what I'm doing, as that is my only option. I ask you to look through the contributions of that account thoroughly, and reconsider the possibility of unblocking me :)

@ToBeFree

Ellidon217 (talk) 16:49, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I personally am not considering this at the moment; I had originally responded to your ping above (01:54, 2 June 2023) and just tried to provide the best advice I had available. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:59, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh Ok, I'm sorry in that case, I will not continue to involve you in this. Ellidon217 (talk) 18:52, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Ellidon217! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 13:23, Friday, June 2, 2023 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge