User talk:Loc863

This is Loc864, Loc863's alt account Loc864 (talk) 16:07, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Yes, this is my alt Loc863 (talk) 16:08, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

I see that you are still not providing edit summaries for your edits, despite having been asked to do so. Please explain what every edit you make is doing. In most cases an edit summary is sufficient for this, but if a longer explanation is needed then provide it on the relevant talk page and state in an edit summary that you are doing so; in both cases there will be an edit summary for the edit. Explaining what your edits do is not optional: it is required by the policy on consensus. It is therefore possible to be blocked from editing for persistent failure to do so, though in practice that rarely happens, because most editors do provide edit summaries once the need for them has been pointed out. JBW (talk) 19:41, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

I’m sorry Loc863 (talk) 13:50, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

Hey Loc! I agree with JBW above and want to suggest a setting in your Preferences page, Editing tab, named "Warn me when I leave an edit page with unsaved changesPrompt me when entering a blank edit summary". That reminder helps me in the good habit of summarizing my edits. Happy editing! — voidxor 14:29, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, voidxor, that's very good advice. I have had that set in my preferences for years, and I've got so used to taking it for granted that I tend to forget it is a preference setting, otherwise I might have suggested it myself. JBW (talk) 17:38, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

I too have had that preference set for years. In fact, I got it wrong; the correct setting is "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary". — voidxor 22:18, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, I just set up that preference. Loc863 (talk) 13:06, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

Loc863, after posting "I'm sorry" above you have made 10 more edits. None of them has had an edit summary. JBW (talk) 17:42, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

On 23 August 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Starface, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Starface was the first album in 19 years to receive a 0/10 score from Pitchfork? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Starface. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (Starface), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

The article Nu1 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Partial title matches only, not a useful disambiguation page

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. SevenSpheres (talk) 19:26, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

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.

Aoidh (talk) 03:16, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

How was I using these abusevly Loc863 (talk) 11:01, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry#Inappropriate uses of alternative accounts. - Aoidh (talk) 14:11, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

I'm sorry Loc863 (talk) 15:25, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

may I be unblocked? Loc863 (talk) 15:26, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

Using two accounts to have a conversation with yourself, obviously intending to mislead people into thinking you are two people, is abusive use of two accounts. As you know, you did that several times, on a number of different talk pages. JBW (talk) 10:25, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Well, I was just using an alt account Loc863 (talk) 12:31, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

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).

Loc863 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

so, I apologize for this, and i will no longer use those accounts if you unblock me.

Decline reason:

I suggest you take the standard offer and re-apply in 6 months time with no more abuse of multiple accounts. PhilKnight (talk) 02:46, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

---

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.

Loc863 (talk) 15:29, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

I’m not an admin, just giving you advice, just asking to be unblocked isn’t going to get you unblocked. Read the guide to appealing blocks, wait 6 months before submitting an unblocked request. Hope this helps. DawnB3 — Preceding undated comment added 01:02, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

6 months? I promise NOT to use any other accounts in a 6-month period. Loc863 (talk) 12:31, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

You still clearly don't understand. You must not use those other accounts period! The 6-month period is just a waiting time before requesting to be unblocked. When experienced editors link you to our policies, you should read and reread them until you understand. I see a theme with you where you react only after getting into trouble—which is too late. The use of sockpuppet accounts is especially egregious around here! I think it's time that you accept that you've messed up again and again, and need to quit bothering the experienced editors for at least six months. The rest of us are here to build a encyclopedia, not to make melodrama. Hopefully you can come back stronger and more mature in six months. — voidxor 15:32, 28 August 2026 (UTC)