User talk:Steven547

Welcome!

Hello, Steven547!

I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Tacyarg (talk) 21:12, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! And i do agree some of the info was trival but stuff like the names of her parents and who they were provides a background of what kind of upbringing she had Steven547 (talk) 18:37, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

August 2025

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Chiyo Miyako) for a period of 24 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. asilvering (talk) 14:32, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you atleast block the guy who started the edit war Steven547 (talk) 14:33, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind i see that you have all i hope this will atleast make him start an afd instead of doing an edit war Steven547 (talk) 14:35, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They can't start an AfD, since they're blocked from the page in question for now, but once your blocks are up, either one of you can take it there. You can also try WP:3O if you want a quick third opinion. -- asilvering (talk) 14:41, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing something im gonna be honest he is getting on my nerves a little he's been starting edit wars ever since he started editing again and he refuses to talk to anyone unless forced Steven547 (talk) 14:42, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you're getting particularly annoyed by any single editor's behaviour (and it looks like you are), it's time to step away from Wikipedia for a bit. Don't keep editing while you're pissed off. You might end up saying something that gets you indef'd for personal attacks. Bummer of a way to go. -- asilvering (talk) 14:45, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Previous accounts or IPs

Steven547, your pattern of engagement on Wikipedia thus far strongly suggests that you have edited prior to creating this account. Could you please clarify prior accounts or IPs that you have used (while remembering your exact IP is unlikely, I would presume that you would have some recollection of pages edited while logged out, and could identify past activity that way). _signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:49, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not really ive been observing for awhile before deciding to make an account Steven547 (talk) 14:51, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He certainly is an extremely provocative editor. Reminds me of Wwew345t who reactivated the pages of Nabi Tajima and Chiyo Miyako and was subsequently blocked for using multiple accounts. MattSucci (talk) 15:08, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And yet you don't see me starting any edit wars.... Steven547 (talk) 15:12, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MattSucci, I was headed to SPI about that myself but got distracted and haven't filed it yet. If you'd be so kind? -- asilvering (talk) 15:12, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All i want is a discussion regarding that page Steven547 (talk) 15:17, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Steven547, if you want a discussion, you have to start a discussion - not edit-war. And if you want the discussion to remain a discussion, and not turn into a slap-fight, you've got to stay calm and civil. The more you let your frustration get the better of you, the less likely it is that you're going to get the outcome you want. -- asilvering (talk) 15:22, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd prefer you did it as I'm going to keep my head down for approximately 23 hours while my partial block is in force. Regards, MattSucci (talk) 15:21, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. -- asilvering (talk) 15:22, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:Wwew345t per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wwew345t. 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.

Vanamonde93 (talk) 15:35, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, here we are. In the SPI, you said all i want is for there to be a discussion regarding the page why am I being attacked for just asking for a discussion. But you weren't "just asking for a discussion", and I know you know that. You were block evading, you were trying to unilaterally overturn a deletion discussion, you were edit-warring, and you were belittling the editor you were edit-warring with. If you want to be able to get this discussion going, ever, at any point in the future, you're going to have to stop doing all of those things. You're going to have to engage with other editors in patience and good faith. Do you think you can do that? -- asilvering (talk) 15:42, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Potty-mouthed rant removed)Steven547 (talk) 16:04, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've now lost talk page access and can't respond, which is unfortunate. You will find that administrators will always take action against you, even if they're also taking action against someone you're fighting with, because you are banned from the community. (See WP:3X.) As long as you are banned, it does not matter what you do, who is right in a dispute, or anything like that - you're banned, and you're not allowed to edit at all. If you want to discuss an unban, you will have to use WP:UTRS. You need to spend several months away from English Wikipedia, without any socking here at all, before anyone will seriously consider an unban. You have to stop trying to blame this on others - you control your behaviour, so the only person responsible for your actions is yourself. (For the same reason, the editor you were edit-warring with remains blocked.) Please consider taking the standard offer, so that you can return to the community and go back to editing. -- asilvering (talk) 19:14, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Please consider taking the standard offer, so that you can return to the community and go back to editing." Go back to editing what, exactly? Using his two accounts and IP address, it would appear that 99% of his edits were purposefully disruptive or at the very least, totally nonconstructive. I have taken approximately an hour to read through the talkpage of Wwew345t, and to be honest, I am completely shocked that he was allowed to get away with so much, for so long. His tone was arrogant, obnoxious and extremely unfriendly, and let's not get into the spelling, grammar, and punctuation. To get to my point, I am astonished at the conciliatory language that has been used by some administrators, there and here, when addressing this "editor". I have my own faults, but I am completely innocuous in comparison. MattSucci (talk) 21:05, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, so innocuous that you're here gravedancing after being warned about it twice already. Let he who is without sin...

Wwew345t isn't going to be able to edit here until he completely reforms his behaviour. He, like any other person, is more likely to manage to do that if extended some simple understanding and compassion. If you can't do that yourself, that's fine; I wouldn't expect you to be able to, after he'd spent so much time antagonizing you. But since you can't do that, you should be spending your time elsewhere. Unlike our erstwhile friend here, most of the encyclopedia is open to you. Go write something that makes you happy, and leave dealing with the people who drive you crazy to someone else. -- asilvering (talk) 23:40, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My mother is an attorney, and she taught us the first rule is this: when you're winning, don't say anything. If Wwew345t can abide by the standard offer and requests an unblock through proper channels, admins will cross that bridge, and if you see another sock file an SPI; nothing more needs to be done here. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 00:27, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic news!!!

I, for one, am very glad to see the back of you. Now I can get back to repairing and tidying all of Wikipedia's supercentenarian articles. MattSucci (talk) 15:57, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Vanamonde93atleast block this guy too for starting numerous edit wars and making personal attacks Steven547 (talk) 16:00, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Its legitimately ridiculous what people whos only concern seems to be delelting articles they don't like can get away with Steven547 (talk) 16:01, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did warn you that you were out of your depth, but you didn't take my advice and continued to edit in a non-productive manner. MattSucci (talk) 16:06, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LMAO thats big talk from someone who started countless edit wars and ranted about "fanboys" who don't exist Steven547 (talk) 16:07, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'll leave it there... MattSucci (talk) 16:09, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's quite enough of that. Talkpage access revoked. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:56, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]