User talk:Bling$Bling$Blang$Blang$

This talk page is becoming long. Consider archiving inactive discussions. Requested; August 2014.

September 2014

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dina Rae (singer). Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Dawn Bard (talk) 10:24, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dawn Bard I was only turning it into a comment section and tidying it up how was that disruptive? Bling$Bling$Blang$Blang$ (talk) 10:26, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You were moving peoples' comments so it wasn't clear who/what they were responding to. It's standard to have comments and !votes in the same section in deletion discussions. Cheers, Dawn Bard (talk) 10:28, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Dina Rae (singer).jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:Dina Rae (singer).jpeg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Green Giant (talk) 17:55, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Green Giant:, it's a photo I took on my phone when I was in LA and Dina was there doing a photo shoot and I said "I'm a HUGE fan Dina; can I get a photo?" and she let me Bling$Bling$Blang$Blang$ (talk) 20:09, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The same image appears on a Youtube video from 19 Feb 2010. You could have uploaded this photo under a different name but you've instead uploaded it with the same name as the file which was deleted. Green Giant (talk) 20:16, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Green Giant: yeah I sent them that photo; do you want me to delete it and rename it? Bling$Bling$Blang$Blang$ (talk) 21:08, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No I think we are going to need you to go through the OTRS route. Please send an email to the address given above, with as much detail as possible, together with the largest copy of the image that you have. Green Giant (talk) 12:11, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Green Giant: the what route? How do I do that; and if I can't do it tomorrow can I do it Saturday? Bling$Bling$Blang$Blang$ (talk) 17:29, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If and when your ban is lifted, this image will need permission-to-reuse from the copyright holder, with a very specific statement which must be sent directly to the email address given at the start of this section. Specific means specific so we can't accept any forwarded emails or statements like "yeah man, sure, use the photo, like". Cheers. Green Giant (talk) 08:34, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely for continued sock puppetry. I decided not to use a standard template to notify you because you could have been a productive member of the community had you chosen not to continue creating sock puppet accounts.

As you are already banned by the community, I recommend that if you wish to return to editing legitimately under a single account to wait out for at least six months and then write an email to Ban Appeals Subcommittee in order to appeal against your community ban. - Mailer Diablo 00:34, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Mailer Diablo: and where are you getting the information that I am a said sock puppet; the person you accused me of being, I've read the message you tagged me in calling me a sock puppet of is in fact a vandal, all I've done is create several articles (three of which were deleted as you can see on my user page), and correct errors made by other users (X being a prime example) and moved pages such as The London Sessions, so I don't accept your uncivilness and accusations! I would like to apply to be unblocked and would like to take note of your actions and accusations as well. Bling$Bling$Blang$Blang$ (talk) 08:46, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Eminem and Dina Rae.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Eminem and Dina Rae.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 01:29, 19 September 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

I've been falsely accused of sock puppetry

Decline reason:

Sorry; this is checkuser confirmed and the editing is similar as well. Use your original account to contest. Good luck. Kuru (talk) 11:47, 19 September 2014 (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 person that I've been accused of being is in fact a known sock puppeteer and a vandal and agressive and banned from Wikipedia, I have been accussed of being them when I don't know how I could be them, all I've done of Wikipedia is create several articles for the singer Dina Rae and some of the pages, mainly her discography has been deleted, not enough sources and info on them, no one's fault, just bad publicity I guess, and I have renamed several pages, and have reverted vandalizm to several pages like the release date to X, I haven't had any problems on here, most of the users have been helpful, such as JennKR who taught me the difference between a singer, songwriter and a singer-songwriter, I have also added various pictures to Dina Rae's articles, I haven't even ruined Wikipedia, I've helped out to improve Wikipedia something MariaJaydHicky never did so I don't think I should've been wrong acussed of being blocked, can someone help me please? Many thanks, Bling$Bling$Blang$Blang$ (talk) 09:42, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Kuru:; check user is wrong, this is my sole account and how are my edits like theirs when I've created articles; Dina Rae, And? (which was deleted), Can't Even C It (which was deleted), The Dina Rae Show (again deleted) and Dina Rae the contents page; I don't vandal unlike MariaJaydHicky who did; I want to know how to get my account unblocked as like I've said I am no way a sock; I don't know how check user could've made an extremely wrong error like that; so can I re apply for my block to be unblocked? If so and how? Bling$Bling$Blang$Blang$ (talk) 12:12, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

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).

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

Request reason:

I've been falsely accused of sock puppetry)

Decline reason:

I've just used the checkuser tool and your account is Technically indistinguishable to Harmony-n-Beatz. In this context, it is probable that you are the same user, and consequently, I am declining this request to be unblocked. PhilKnight (talk) 19:29, 19 September 2014 (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 person that I've been accused of being is in fact a known sock puppeteer and a vandal and agressive and banned from Wikipedia, I have been accussed of being them when I don't know how I could be them, all I've done of Wikipedia is create several articles for the singer Dina Rae and some of the pages, mainly her discography has been deleted, not enough sources and info on them, no one's fault, just bad publicity I guess, and I have renamed several pages, and have reverted vandalizm to several pages like the release date to X, I haven't had any problems on here, most of the users have been helpful, such as JennKR who taught me the difference between a singer, songwriter and a singer-songwriter, I have also added various pictures to Dina Rae's articles, I haven't even ruined Wikipedia, I've helped out to improve Wikipedia something MariaJaydHicky never did, all she did was vandalize and called a user a "slanted eye cunt" and said "I would never fuck a Japanese guy both them and Chinks have tiny cocks and also he's a batty bwoy so unless I had a cock he'd like it but to be quiet frank; hopefully you'll see he's a cunt and always will be a cunt and should get a life or a virus." so I don't think I should've been wrong acussed of being blocked; when there are editors who talk like they've come from an Amenity tip and try and ruin Wikipedia for users like myself who are more interested in Wikipedia and making articles. Many thanks Bling$Bling$Blang$Blang$ (talk) 14:46, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also I have proof of who I am; it's a photo of me with my copy of Dina Rae's hand signed copy of The Dina Rae Show and it show's me Bling$Bling$Blang$Blang$ (talk) 18:09, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

This user is asking that his block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

Not a sock puppet; don;t know how I am coming up as one

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Not a sock puppet; don;t know how I am coming up as one |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Not a sock puppet; don;t know how I am coming up as one |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Not a sock puppet; don;t know how I am coming up as one |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

When I am not a sock puppet; my IP keeps changing and gets auto blocks when I've not done anything so I shouldn't be blocked at all. Bling$Bling$Blang$Blang$ (talk) 19:32, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]