Archives

1, 2, 3, 4

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

GoldenBootWizard276 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I would love to continue working on Wikipedia, this time taking due diligence to ensure that I am not committing any copyright violations. My previous unblock request was declined because of accusations that it was written using AI. In order to disprove these accusations, I emailed the admins who had presided over my unblock requests various notes and drafts that went into the writing of it, and I pointed out how AI detectors often produce false positives. However, I have not yet gotten a response. Therefore, I would like for my block to be reviewed with the evidence (which I believe disproves beyond a reasonable doubt that my previous request was written with AI) being considered. Below I will include a mega.nz link to the relevant material: [5] GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 8:18 am, 14 January 2025, last Tuesday (2 days ago) (UTC−9)

Accept reason:

Accepting per the below conversation. For at least your next five new page submissions, use the AFC process to submit the pages as drafts, allowing for review for possible close paraphrasing or other copyright issues. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 00:38, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) I very much don't think the previous request was written by AI, as, while being very technical (maybe too much), it shows very little of the characteristics of typical LLM outputs (it has virtually no "empty prose" and is very to-the-point, and the less common words are actual technical terms rather than synonyms added for the sake of embellishment). I took a look at the additional evidence and it looks pretty convincing – even if the request was really AI-written, the additional material in the handwritten notes and the explanations you gave show that you have done a good amount of research about copyright law, which is a great thing to see. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:18, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MER-C:, I'm inclined to grant a second chance here. This user has been quizzed at length and has given reasonable replies, which were rejected because of a suspicion they were written by an LLM. They have pledged to be more mindful and to not to commit further copyvios, one would assume with the understanding that if they did, they would be reblocked and there would be little to no chance of a sucessful appeal at that point. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 21:14, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to back up @Chaotic Enby's assessment as well - this doesn't look like empty LLM prose to me, either. @Beeblebrox and @MER-C, what do you think about having their next few drafts go through AfC, with a specific note to the AfC reviewers to check for close paraphrasing before accepting? -- asilvering (talk) 23:34, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's unreasonable, although it would basically be on the honor system. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 23:47, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This request seems genuine. However, copyright unblocks are very risky. I'll leave this to someone else. MER-C 20:11, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So, I guess the question here for GoldenBootWizard276 is this: would you agree to the above proposal by asilvering? An exact number has not been specified, but would you consent to sending new creations as drafts through AFC for a while, and to note, I suppose on the talk page, that a review specifically looking for close paraphrasing is in order? Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 20:32, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree to that proposal. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 20:46, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Best to make an actual AFC comment, since reviewers won't necessarily notice the talk page. I'll keep an eye out for the first handful of drafts and put a note on them. Let's put the number at 5 - not 5 submissions, but 5 drafts that are ok'd. Seems like a good number, since that's how many violations we look for before opening a WP:CCI investigation. -- asilvering (talk) 21:18, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. I've gone ahead and unblocked. I have not logged this at RESTRICT as it is a fairly limited unblock condition. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 00:40, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Character limit, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Reconrabbit 00:24, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GoldenBootWizard276

I edit here too, under the username Jlwoodwa and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've asked for a discussion about the redirect Magibon.com, created by you. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 19 § Magibon.com.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Jlwoodwa}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

jlwoodwa (talk) 02:25, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GoldenBootWizard276. Thank you for your work on 24 US presidential election. Another editor, MPGuy2824, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

this could also refer to the 1924 US Presidential election or the 1824 US Presidential election

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 04:12, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GoldenBootWizard276. Thank you for your work on Drake the type of guy. Another editor, MPGuy2824, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

what is this? If it is a meme, it should have enough notability to be mentioned at the target page.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 04:18, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GoldenBootWizard276. Thank you for your work on Drake the type. Another editor, MPGuy2824, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

If it is a noteworthy meme, it should be mentioned in the target page before the redirect is created

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 04:18, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Drake the type has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 19 § Drake the type until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:54, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Drake the type of guy has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 19 § Drake the type of guy until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:54, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GoldenBootWizard276

I edit here too, under the username Miminity and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've asked for a discussion about the redirect 24 US presidential election, created by you. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 19 § 24 US presidential election.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Miminity}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 09:28, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can I ask how you edited it? I'm stil rather new at Wikipedia. Spodogo (talk) 17:14, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Spodogo: Sure, the file which you put in the infobox "File: Cropped1.jpg", does not exist, I replaced it with this long-titled image in the "image=" parameter. You can see comparing your revision to mine, here. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 17:20, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just a heads up, I reverted your recent changes to United States Secretary of Health and Human Services. Per MOS:JOBTITLES, both the position and the portfolio are lowercase when modified to be a description. Cheers! Woko Sapien (talk) 22:16, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GoldenBootWizard276

I edit here too, under the username Jlwoodwa and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've asked for a discussion about the redirect L. Wallace, created by you. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 30 § L. Wallace.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Jlwoodwa}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

jlwoodwa (talk) 23:07, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Norman Bleehen. Thanks! Ldm1954 (talk) 11:21, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Thomas Cooke, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:16, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Norman Bleehen, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Ldm1954 (talk) 22:43, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello@GoldenBootWizard276! It's me, from vikidia!;) Nedia Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 20:29, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 04:36, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Gomphiocephalus. Thanks! Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gomphiocephalus, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Half black half white has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 20 § Half black half white until a consensus is reached. Rusalkii (talk) 06:06, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Friesea grisea. Thanks! Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:26, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Friesea grisea, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:26, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Gheus was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dennis Graham (musician) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 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 or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Gheus (talk) 17:15, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, GoldenBootWizard276! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Gheus (talk) 17:15, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leeds Savage Club, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Gheus (talk) 17:17, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Women farting has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 3 § Women farting until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:21, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Girl farts has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 3 § Girl farts until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:21, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Girl fart has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 3 § Girl fart until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:21, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
• reliable
• secondary
• independent of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Both GBIF, WoRMS and NCBI have this as a synonym of Cryptopygus & Cryptopygus nivicolus.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Neocryptopygus and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 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 or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 15:30, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, we don't create taxonomy templates for a species such as Neocryptopygus nivicolus. In the article, using {{Speciesbox}} means that the taxonomic hierarchy is picked up from the taxonomy template for the genus. Peter coxhead (talk) 16:29, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Cryptopygus nivicolus. Thanks! Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:55, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cryptopygus nivicolus, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:55, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]