User talk:Oxus4

Dwarf water cobra, 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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! 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 leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Laplorfill (talk) 03:58, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! --Renat 09:47, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Brycehughes. I noticed that you recently removed content from Indian cobra without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Brycehughes (talk) 17:32, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Drmies (talk) 16:18, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I asked and pleaded to allow me to edit again, waited months. I'm not doing anything wrong nor am I edit warring. Look at my contributions - I created the Dwarf water cobra, Iranian krait, and have contributed to Wikipedia Commons with pictures. I abused several different accounts 6-12 years ago. Is that forever going to be held over my head? Drmies and Casliber - please look at my contributions under Oxus4. I've not done anything wrong. Yes, having multiple accounts is wrong, edit warring, vandalism, and not contributing to make Wikipedia better is not what you should be doing, but that is not what I'm trying to do here. I had plans on doing some really good work on various elapids, especially starting articles that have not yet been created. Nobody paid any attention to my pleads over 6 months ago. Casliber even created a spot to get the opinion of other admins, but nobody even gave a "yes" or "no". I'm not trying to vandalize or abuse Wikipedia, on the contrary, I'm trying to improve it in the areas I can. So I get blocked again. No discussion, no look at my work or my intentions - just blocked. I understand why I was blocked all those years ago and I stayed away. But I'm not doing anything wrong now. Yes, I created another account, but that's after I pleaded and waited for over 6 months with no response on whether I would be allowed back or not. But, you guys are the admins, so you can hold things from 6-12 years ago over my head till now I guess. My contributions with Oxus4 have not been bad, but that won't be taken into consideration. Only the fact that I had several different accounts over 5 years ago. When Pincotti got blocked, I finally decided to just ask to be allowed back. However, nobody seemed to care. So I created a new one, hoping I could use that and only that - but I get blocked again. My intentions were only good. Oxus4 (talk) 16:54, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is not about your intentions, it's about what you did, and I added a note to User:Casliber/for community discussion. You keep saying "I add good stuff", but first of all that's a matter for other to judge, and second, well, you started yet another account, and on top of that you edited as an IP, from a range that I just blocked--so no, you're not sticking to your part of the deal. Surely WP:OFFER has been pointed out to you. Drmies (talk) 17:10, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Oxus4, I could just leave it and you'd be indefblocked. I created a subpage at User:Casliber/for community discussion to think about how we go from here. I still find mistakes in trying to clean up and because of your past history everything has to be double checked. Given this is a hobby and sometimes other things take priority for an extended period, I could just leave you blocked. Still fixing things. But I am still looking at more recent edits as a whole. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:30, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Casliber, thank you and I appreciate that you are willing to continue with the the whole WP:OFFER, but I'm a bit discouraged. Honestly, I feel like some admins are opposed to me (some I don't even know or remember conversing with, so I'm not sure why they'd even oppose me). For example, two articles I recently created: Bungarus persicus (Persian krait/Iranian krait) and Dwarf water cobra (Naja nana) were both deleted by User:Materialscientist simply because I created them. I put work into those articles. I'm also a keeper of venomous snakes, so I was able to upload my own pics of a Naja mandalayensis. I created/started from scratch probably 25-30% of all the Naja articles, are they going to be deleted too? I feel like I'm fighting a losing battle and all I wanted to do was improve Wikipedia where I can. I cleaned up the mess in the venom section in the Coastal taipan article, only to be reverted back to the mess it was by Eostrix. He/she did because I was a "sock", not paying any attention to the improvements, which you can see the difference here. Some grammatical errors, but an improvement from what it was, no? Anyway, all I'm trying to say is I'm ready to give up. I tried to go the appropriate route after being gone for 5 or 6 years and I was patient for over 6 months, so I made a few edits without creating an account, then I finally did and I get in trouble again. I'm not sure this is worth it anymore. Oxus4 (talk) 04:28, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Banned means banned. The way back in to Wikipedia is a successful appeal, not socking.--Eostrix  (^{🦉 hoot} _hoot🦉) 10:08, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]