User talk:Dacheatcode

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Chicken fingers. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Materialscientist (talk) 01:35, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Dacheatcode. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Exemplo347 (talk) 19:41, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Acroterion (talk) 17:24, 19 December 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

the block is no longer necessary because you understand what you are blocked for, you will not do it again, and you will make productive contributions instead Dacheatcode (talk) 00:23, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This is not a vaild unblock request; you've simply copied a portion of WP:GAB to the request. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:25, 20 December 2016 (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 can't overwrite a declined request, you need to post a new one.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:30, 20 December 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

the block is no longer necessary because you understand what you are blocked for, you will not do it again, and you will make productive contributions instead. first reason for blocking was because i called someone john podesta and he was really mad about that, can't understand why since he originally made a personal attack on me. only other instance of "vandalism" stemmed from edits made 7 years ago that was reverted by myself anyway. indefinite block here is out of place Dacheatcode (talk) 00:23, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You're blocked for not being here to build an encyclopedia. In your next unblock request, you might like to address this reason. PhilKnight (talk) 00:37, 20 December 2016 (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 is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

ive made plenty of contributory edits to wikipedia, my recent attempts to create plausible redirects to chicken nuggets are based off of real world slang as well as documented memes. according to the page that talked about my banning, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Inappropriate_Redirects_from_User%3ADacheatcode) i was banned for vandalism. however, the only vandalism was for an article i edited 7 years ago that i reverted myself. my redirects were called "silly" but not "vandalism." I was also accused of being NOTHERE or whatever because im a 4channer apparently? while i did have an edit war with a user (many editors do) i stopped without any moderator interaction. i also stopped making redirect pages without proper citation. Dacheatcode (talk) 00:49, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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=ive made plenty of contributory edits to wikipedia, my recent attempts to create plausible redirects to chicken nuggets are based off of real world slang as well as documented memes. according to the page that talked about my banning, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Inappropriate_Redirects_from_User%3ADacheatcode) i was banned for vandalism. however, the only vandalism was for an article i edited 7 years ago that i reverted myself. my redirects were called "silly" but not "vandalism." I was also accused of being NOTHERE or whatever because im a 4channer apparently? while i did have an edit war with a user (many editors do) i stopped without any moderator interaction. i also stopped making redirect pages without proper citation.  [[User:Dacheatcode|Dacheatcode]] ([[User talk:Dacheatcode#top|talk]]) 00:49, 20 December 2016 (UTC) |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=ive made plenty of contributory edits to wikipedia, my recent attempts to create plausible redirects to chicken nuggets are based off of real world slang as well as documented memes. according to the page that talked about my banning, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Inappropriate_Redirects_from_User%3ADacheatcode) i was banned for vandalism. however, the only vandalism was for an article i edited 7 years ago that i reverted myself. my redirects were called "silly" but not "vandalism." I was also accused of being NOTHERE or whatever because im a 4channer apparently? while i did have an edit war with a user (many editors do) i stopped without any moderator interaction. i also stopped making redirect pages without proper citation.  [[User:Dacheatcode|Dacheatcode]] ([[User talk:Dacheatcode#top|talk]]) 00:49, 20 December 2016 (UTC) |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=ive made plenty of contributory edits to wikipedia, my recent attempts to create plausible redirects to chicken nuggets are based off of real world slang as well as documented memes. according to the page that talked about my banning, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Inappropriate_Redirects_from_User%3ADacheatcode) i was banned for vandalism. however, the only vandalism was for an article i edited 7 years ago that i reverted myself. my redirects were called "silly" but not "vandalism." I was also accused of being NOTHERE or whatever because im a 4channer apparently? while i did have an edit war with a user (many editors do) i stopped without any moderator interaction. i also stopped making redirect pages without proper citation.  [[User:Dacheatcode|Dacheatcode]] ([[User talk:Dacheatcode#top|talk]]) 00:49, 20 December 2016 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}