User talk:The goat with a horn on his head

a list of tips that you can put up here. anything's fine. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 23:40, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Iamurgoldfish Iamyourgoldfish (talk) 21:24, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

anything is fine that relates to the topic. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 23:41, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

We say how do we create AN article not a, but else, it is a good question. Iamyourgoldfish (talk) 21:25, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

And I unfortunately don’t know the awnser to ur question. Iamyourgoldfish (talk) 21:25, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Northstar Line, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:23, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

i want to leave wikipedia forever, so can i leave. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 22:29, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi! Sorry you are leaving Wikipedia! If you need help, ask at the Teahouse. If you unfortunately do wish to leave, place {{Retired}} on the top of your user page. See Wikipedia:RETIRE for more information. Regrets, Robloxguest3 (talk) 02:07, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

I think its Semi-retirement The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 22:08, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Pls stay😊 ~2026-26293-14 (talk) 17:40, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

You reply fast. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 17:49, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Press the button at high at left, and then press log out. Iamyourgoldfish (talk) 20:32, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Please stop posting to the talk page of every admin. If you want to communicate with admins as a group, post to the administrator noticeboard. 331dot (talk) 19:52, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

ok thanks. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:54, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

What’s an admin? Iamyourgoldfish (talk) 21:26, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war, according to the reverts you've made to WP:TASK. This means that you are repeatedly reverting content back to how you think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree. Once it is known that there is a disagreement, users are expected to collaborate with others, avoid editing disruptively, and try to reach a consensus – rather than repeatedly reverting the changes made by other users.

Important points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive behavior – regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not engage in edit warring – even if you believe that you are right.

You need to discuss the disagreement on the article's talk page and work towards a revision that represents consensus among everyone involved. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution if discussions reach an impasse. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to engage in edit warring, you may be blocked from editing.

It’s clear that you mean well, but your edits in relation to backlogs today are tantamount to a bull in a china shop. Please slow down and reflect. I’d suggest reviewing WP:NODEADLINE_signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:59, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you believe that 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 ~~~~}} or use the unblock wizard.

— ERcheck (talk) 21:42, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

For what it's worth (courtesy ping to ERcheck), while I do have some NOTHERE concerns, my overall impression here is of someone who is young, overeager, and does not yet have a strong understanding of how Wikipedia works and how to be helpful. Personally, I was considering issuing something more along the lines of a p-block from WP-space, WP-talk space, and User-talk space in order to see if they're willing to do some actual constructive editing, although I don't exactly disagree with a block. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:53, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

@Rosguill - I understand your point. From the back and forth on the talk page, this seems to be a playground for a couple of young editors. If the user is interested in constructive editing, he/she can appeal the block here. . Certainly, the points you have made can be taken into account. — ERcheck (talk) 22:04, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Agreed, a good appeal will go a long way. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:09, 30 April 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).

The goat with a horn on his head (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

I am really sorry for all of that. I really mean that. I admit that the spamming of the message was something I should have not done, and was way overboard. I really wish that I could have been fine with putting it on the talk pages of various wikiprojects that was related but I was not. I started to put the message on many users talk pages, including my own. I was definitely wrong there, as I didn't think about what I was doing was spamming, which was very disruptive. To continue, I went to the main page and put the message on that talk pages, and then I went to the list of administrators that edited in the last 2 months and went down 9 from the beginning. That was when I was told by 331 Dot that I should stop, so I stopped. However I did not delete those messages (now looking back, I should have), and never thought about doing so. :So I went to where I was told to go, the administrators noticeboard. I posted the message there. then the user, the clocks always turn, who I thought was an administrator, as this was the administrators noticeboard, responded shortly after. He said it looked really bad, and "we have a lot of work to do..." so I asked him where should I put the message, and he said to put it on the task center, so, as eager as I was, I put a big message on the front of the task center the notice, and user roseguill took it down. :I should have gone back and see what the clocks always turn meant, but as eager as I was, I undid his action. He undid my action, and he himself wrote the edit warring conversation on this page. At the same time, a person I spammed responded to my spam and I was trying to show him how to find the work that needs to be done when I got blocked. I really hope that I can at least get a lesser version of the block. By the way, before the spam, I made my 100th edit. this shows that I am really wanting to do Wikipedia, I still enjoy Wikipedia and its great system, and I still want to edit. What may help me will be if I could get shown how this works, I now a little, but I am still having a hard time looking at :May someone please notify, Gears Datapacks and, The Clocks Always Turn of my block and my confession. :Hope you still have a great day, despite my disruption

Decline reason:

Closing as only one block request should be open at a time. User updated unblock request at 17:35, 1 May 2026 (UTC) — ERcheck (talk) 21:06, 1 May 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.

I will be checking here on 4:50 PST The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 23:07, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

@The goat with a horn on his head:: A few questions and comments:

1. Did you read the guide to appealing blocks linked above?
2. Have you read any/all of the links provided in the warning messages on your talk page? (For example, on the WP:MOS)
3. You have not explained what you will do differently in the future if unblocked.
4. You note that you made 100 edits "before the spam". How many of these edits were actually contributions to Wikipedia? How many were disruptive? (The number of edits is not a convincing argument for unblocking.)
5. You said, "What may help me will be if I could get shown how this works." You have been given feedback and Wikipedia has help page and tutorials. I recommend that you spend some time reading the help/tutorial pages available so that gain a better understanding of how to contribute constructively, for example Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia.

— ERcheck (talk) 03:13, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

1. I did yes
2. I did yes
3. I just put it in the next review.
4. A fraction of the 100 edits were for editing Wikipedia. Most were for asking for help, a fraction for my draft I was working on, and the rest was for editing wikipedia articles.
5. I just did yes

The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 18:26, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

@The goat with a horn on his head - "Spend some time" is meant to ask you to spend time learning more about better contributing to Wikipedia - not just a few minuates, or an hour or two; but, the time you are blocked. Come back again in at least a week from now and summarize what you will do in the future; not what you want other to do on your behalf. — ERcheck (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

If you say that the list is inappropriate, then that list will just be a list for me to do when I am unblocked (I will change the title of the article). Also, i'm confused on the last sentence you wrote. Can you baby talk it out for me? The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:11, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

@The goat with a horn on his head - Who said "the list is inappropriate"? — ERcheck (talk) 21:09, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Also, this block could violate the WP:BITE costom. No offence intended The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:21, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

And to remind you,

This user is new to Wikipedia. Please assume good faith, remain civil, and be calm, patient, helpful, and polite while they become accustomed to Wikipedia and its intricacies.

The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:28, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Blocks should not be punitive. there is an essay with this title that you should read. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:34, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

"Vandalism is often best reverted without comment. But anyone who is trying to improve the encyclopedia, however ineptly, should be welcomed and assisted to make productive edits. Limited research has shown^{[by whom?]} that established editors generally agree on whether an editor is good-faith (trying to help) or bad-faith (vandals and pranksters). They often disagree on whether an editor's first edits should be retained. If in doubt, leave it in, fix it, or inline-tag it so the newbie can fix."

This is a quote from WP:ENCOURAGE please read this. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:36, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Also please don't be a hypocrite by not reading any of these links. You did tell me, "Have you read any/all of the links provided in the warning messages on your talk page?" I hope you can help. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:38, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

This is a good example of what you can do. from the bottom of Wikipedia:Encourage the newcomers

"How to stop blocked editors from treading the wrong path

If a good-faith newcomer you recently met just got hit with an indef-block, suggest two options: either a mentorship, or a standard offer. These are good ways to give an indef-blocked editor a chance to come back and edit. Don't encourage them to take up new accounts and edit under new names, and don't encourage them to take the wrong path. Encouraging trouble will help neither you nor the newbie, and encouraging bad behaviour makes you look like a jerk in front of the whole community. Remember that this could potentially be troll feeding." The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:41, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

please read

"Almost no new editor has the competence to edit Wikipedia. You can help them acquire it.

Almost no new editor has the competence to edit Wikipedia. You can help them acquire it.

Avoid giving new editors any feeling of hostility. People tend to underestimate the friendliness of strangers. In a text-only communication channel, no one can read your tone of voice or your facial expression, so it's easy to be misunderstood. Using emoticons has been shown to make text interpretation more consistent. Try reading your talk-page edits to yourself in a really hostile tone of voice before saving. If it sounds utterly laughable, save. If it sounds hostile, rewrite. A new editor will not accept guidance from you if they hate you.

It's even harder for a new user to communicate without misunderstandings. Being a new editor can be frustrating, especially if you encounter editors who are oblivious to your struggles to learn, or even rude about them. Rudeness is contagious; it makes editors its vectors. Assume good faith a bit harder than usual, and answer rudeness with kindness.

New users often have great difficulty figuring out Talk pages, and give up editing as a result. If a new editor does not answer you on a Talk page, it may be because they are oblivious to your post, or perplexed and intimidated by the interface. Linking to Special:EmailUser (optionally appending "/[yourusername]" to that link) may be helpful; the e-mail form is a familiar interface, and once you can receive communications from them, it will be much easier for you to help them. It might also be helpful to link to Help:Talk pages. You can fix missing signatures with Template:Signing.

Dealing with newcomers can also be frustrating and repetitive. The necessary gentleness may come more easily when you are more patient, and more reliably when you use conscious techniques for discussing conflict. Newcomers quickly pick up new social habits for their new society; they learn to value what they see valued, from competence to bullying.

Where possible, phrase guidance as information, not as orders. Anyone editing here probably likes to be given information; no-one likes to be ordered around. Avoid any hint of coercion, especially threats. Avoid causing reactance. When describing consequences, depersonalize conflict: "Do it again and I'll revert you" is not as good as "Edits like that will tend to get reverted, because...". Try to describe consequences in positive terms, and make your requests specific and easy to enact: "Edits like that will get reverted" is not as good as "If you can support that statement with a citation to a source that meets the criteria at WP:MEDRS, we can restore it. There might be something on PubMed". The lower-level warning templates avoid threats of sanctions for good reasons.

Explain. Link intelligibly to descriptions of community norms. Where needed, explain the intent behind rules (in the talk space or documentation). Sometimes linking to the situation that motivated the rule's creation is a good inductive way to explain the purpose of the rule. Wikipedia's norms are generally sound, and we can amend them. Defending them by blatant assertion is not necessary (just quick and easy).

A new editor may have difficulty figuring out whether a task is appropriate to their skill level. First, identify the newcomer's goal. If they are attempting something really hard, you can warn them it's likely to be a frustrating learning curve, and offer to suggest easier tasks that will teach them the wikiskills they need to accomplish their original goal. If they are trying to do something impermissible, you can explain why it can't be done (or not yet), and offer help with selecting another goal. When you criticize a newcomer's efforts, simultaneously offer clear newcomer-comprehensible guidance on how they can improve. "Your work is bad per policy X" is not helpful; explaining exactly what they need to do next to make progress towards their goal is helpful.

If you wish to dedicate some time to helping new editors, you can become a Teahouse host or mentor a new editor." The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:45, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Also, what did you mean when you said Clearly not being here to build an encyclopedia. what reason. WP:NOTHERE The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:52, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

I mainly suggested that we had a lot of work to do on the basis that it was a pretty large backlog. I never meant to put it up in big emphasis on the task center, but more of as a recommendation to those who can't find anything to do. I also wish that I was pinged when mentioned in this. TheClocksAlwaysTurn (The Clockworks) (contribs) 15:31, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I did not know. Also @TheClocksAlwaysTurn, I thought you were an admin, because you posted on the admins noticeboard. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 16:03, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Not only admins are active at that noticeboard. For example, people sometimes comment on issues being reported to that noticeboard, when they are not admins. Since this misunderstanding, I've put what UserRights I have as a link in my signature. TheClocksAlwaysTurn (The Clockworks) (contribs)(rights) 16:08, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I never knew. I also tried to tell someone to ping you, but I guess It never happened. Do you see my humility in this situation? If so, can you help me write a good argument? I really need the help. Will be back around 10:15 Pacific Standard Time. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 16:18, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm not going to help you write a good argument for your block, as YOU must prove that you are able to use editing privileges correctly. The only help I will give is recommending you look at Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks. TheClocksAlwaysTurn (The Clockworks) (contribs)(rights) 16:23, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Ok, sigh, I guess you can't really help me. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 17:17, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

The goat with a horn on his head (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

I understand what I did wrong. I Spammed the message everywhere, I broke the 3 revert rule (Which I never new at the time) I edit warred, and I was spreading false information, spamming content on the 1, the user talk pages of NANDtrocity, Arlo Barnes, 331 Dot, 5 albert square, 78.26, Acalamari, Acroterion, Ad Orientem, Adam Bishop, Ahecht, Alexf, Amakuru, and Amire80 and spammed on the wikipedia talk pages of the Administrators' Noticeboard, Cleanup, Main Page Backlog, and Task Center, before 331 Dot told me to stop. I broke the 3 revert rule from reverting the deletion of the notice I put on the task page. I had spread false information, I was on the talk page, the administrators noticeboard, where the stop message told me to go, and user The Clocks Always Turn responded a few minutes later, who I thought was an administrator. I put the information on the front of the task center that said that The Clocks Always Turn was an admin, who said I could do it.

When I am unblocked, sometime in the future, I will appropriately spread information of the backlogs and will love to help you and everyone. Most of the work will be done by me, and I will love to continue editing Wikipedia. As long as I am blocked, I will post a topic about edits that wikipedians can do for me untill I am unblocked. Thank you for your time to read this.

Accept reason:

per discussionValereee (talk) 11:18, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 17:35, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Hey, Goat. I'm willing to discuss this block with you. While we're doing that, I'd like you to please stop posting anything else except responses to me and other editors who come into this conversation. Can you agree to that? Valereee (talk) 14:06, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I guess that's a no? Valereee (talk) 16:40, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I did not see. your comments were small. and hard to pick up, because it was virtual, get it? Jokes aside, I would love to start. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 17:14, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Also I told everyone I would take a short wiki break In till now. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 17:15, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Okay, so no more posting in other convos here? I ask because five minutes after you posted here, you posted to one above. Valereee (talk) 17:32, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

That is technically my fault I think, I sincerely apologize. I was responding to when I first saw that I was mentioned, and didn't realize there was this request here. TheClocksAlwaysTurn (The Clockworks) (contribs)(rights) 17:36, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Oh, But you said to other editors. I guess I misunderstood. I agree to not to post to anything other than this topic. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 17:35, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Great. So, I think you understand why you were blocked. I want you to look at this chart, which shows where you've been editing. That red pie is your main space edits -- that is, edits made to articles. That is only 14 edits, 8% of your total edits. What we typically see with a brand new editor who is trying to contribute is probably 75% of total edits are to articles. Why do you think that's what we typically see? Valereee (talk) 17:43, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I would think that the main part of edits being the talk page is because of 1, all of the messaging in my talk page when they blocked me, and 2, the spam I did making notice of an "major problem" and that it took up of 20 edits in that section. Is there a way to see the chart from back in time? That may be more helpful depending of your situation. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 18:18, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Yes, that huge slice of pink is mostly due to your edits here and at the talk of a single other user (possibly a mentor?), but even if we remove user talk completely, your main space edits would still only be 18% of your remaining edits. That is very unusual. Why do you think that's not what we typically see from newer editors? Valereee (talk) 18:25, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Yes, the user @GearsDatapacks is my mentor, the user @Iamyourgoldfish was a person who I was trying to guide through Wikipedia, as he was confused about how to edit Wikipedia. but as you can see on his talk page, he was sad for me not being able to speak to him, and as a result, he was blocked for being used abusively. The same thing happened to @I love jim carrey. ( sorry for the red link, he has no talk page.) The Wikipedia talk section is all part of the spam. And the category section is the backlogs I reported. And the draft is the draft for a school I am working on. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 18:49, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Also I was trying to find edits for Wikipedia pages instead of using the suggested edits tab because I could not find anything I was interested in and there was to few things to narrow the articles down. Also, I just like the internals of Wikipedia better. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 18:52, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

So, I just like the internals of Wikipedia better is often a problem, especially for a brand new user. That's exactly what I was getting at with asking why you think it's more typical for us to see a pie chart like this one: practically all red. That's because typically someone starting editing is looking for articles to improve, not looking for internal workings. We are WP:Here to build an encyclopedia. We don't actually need people who are brand new to start contributing in Wikipedia space. It's often actually the opposite of helpful.

A good example of why is your own. Why did you think it would be helpful to post to all those people's user talk pages? Valereee (talk) 19:02, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I thought I needed to spread the word to various people (I was "overeager", as said in the notice saying I was indefinitely blocked) who were in the various committees that were involved in the backlogs (or in the list of contributors on these wiki projects), but then, I was told to stop, as you can see at the conversation marked stop. Right after he said the word, I completely stopped. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:13, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Also, may I please put the article you sent me on my To-do list, It has to many links in one section. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:19, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Sure, put it on the to-do, but do eventually read through it. Valereee (talk) 19:22, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

And do you now see how your inexperience with Wikipedia combined with your desire to work in Wikipedia space ended up wasting a bunch of people's time? Valereee (talk) 19:24, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I don't see how. Can you explain further? The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:28, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Sure. Every time you post to someone's user talk, you ask for a little bit of their time to check it out. When you post the same thing to a dozen people's user talk, you're asking for a little bit of a dozen people's time to check the same thing. Our most valuable resource here is volunteer time, so when a dozen people check something, eleven of them are wasting their time checking something someone else has already been asked to check. If you believe there's a problem that needs checking, the place to post about it is at wp:administrators noticeboard. Valereee (talk) 19:39, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Ah, I see what you mean. If you want to know what happened, you can read my full unblock request that was rejected up there a long ways. ↑ The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:48, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I have to go. be back as soon as possible. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:54, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Take your time, WP:NODEADLINES here.

Yes, I've read both unblock requests. What I am going to suggest as an unblock condition is that you agree to a block from Wikipedia space and Wikipedia space talk pages along with an agreement that you will not post anything to more than a single editor's user talk. You can appeal this when you have 500 edits, as long as you don't game that. Is that something you can agree to? Valereee (talk) 19:58, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I do. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 20:05, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

@ERcheck, any objection? Valereee (talk) 20:20, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

He is currently taking a wiki break, and you probably wont here from him for a while.

Meanwhile, we could talk about this.

Now would it be a good idea to create a wiki project that aims to provide a greeting to new Wikipedians and those members try to help them around? I ask asking because I've seen SO many Wikipedia accounts that are extremely young get blocked from editing and they seem to not know what to do. I am wondering if you would like to help with this project, and maybe we could invite others like mentors if they would like to join. I can see great potential in this wiki project, and that there might just be a greater amount of wikipedians helping to shape Wikipedia. So do you want to help me out with making this project? The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 20:47, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

@Valereee - Sounds reasonable. @The goat with a horn on his head, it is important that you do not game the system to get to 500 edits, e.g. making tiny changes to build up edit count. I also concur that more time should be spent learning about Wikipedia and contributing to content, not on fixing infrastructure, etc. For example, The goat with a horn on his head said it would be a good idea to create a project aimed at "a greeting to new Wikipedians and those members try to help them around." If you had followed the links provided to you(14 April 2025), you would have found that such a project exits. As @Valereee notes below, "I'm going to ask that when I give you a link, you read that linked page or section in its entirety". I add to that, after reading it, ask "How can I use what I learned to contributed constructively to Wikipedia? Or, how will I change my actions/attitudes based on what I just read? — ERcheck (talk) 23:29, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

What, I did not know. I just might have skipped over it before I made a commitment. I am so sorry. I will try to apply what I read to help with my actions. These are wise words, and I will take value in them. For the wiki group, I will look in on that. Again, sorry for missing the link.

Best regards, The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 04:46, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, ERcheck. Goat, I've made that adjustment. Enjoy working on articles. Valereee (talk) 11:20, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Also sorry for the wait, I got turned off of the computer for a little bit. Had to do things. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 18:24, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

WP:NODEADLINES. I'm going to ask that when I give you a link, you read that linked page or section in its entirety. You don't have to study it, there's no test, but it's good for you to get into the habit of reading links when people give them to you. Valereee (talk) 18:27, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I have already started to do that, but thanks for the tip. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 18:28, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Can you help me find someone to appeal my unblocked request. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 00:16, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Your request is open and pending. It will be reviewed in due course, we cannot guarantee a timeframe. 331dot (talk) 01:31, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

how long does it usually take for a block to be reviewed? The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 02:34, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

It depends. Usually the time frame is days or weeks. PhilKnight (talk) 14:38, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

@The goat with a horn on his head - REVIEWED: Instead of rejecting your appeal outright, I provided a number of questions and comments just below your unblock requests. Please answer the questions, plus revise your appeal reasons to elaborate. To help with your appeal, consider using the unblock wizard that is linked in the block notice. — ERcheck (talk) 17:09, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the consideration. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 18:26, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

• {{this is a new user}}

The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:23, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

1, Category:Noindexed articles needs to have a backlog notice with a limit of 500 there is 1,888 articles in it https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Noindexed_articles&pagefrom=Base+94#mw-pages

2, The article Wa (name of Japan), could be merged with Japan. The reason is because the article Wa has a very small amount of views compared to the article Japan, and the Article Japan only has one sentence mentioning that the country was once named Wa. The sentence is this "Before 日本 was adopted in the early 8th century, the country was known in China as Wa (倭, changed in Japan around 757 to 和) and in Japan by the endonym Yamato." This is not nearly enough information as the article, Wa, as a lot of information and most of the views is from the articles that link from it. Also the Wa article has a lot of problems and merging it with Japan would remove the 2+ maintenance banners on the article. Wa article here Wa (name of Japan) and Japan article here Japan

3, This user page ERcheck has dark mode problems. To add the warning, enter this without parentheses. {({dark mode problems})} The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 18:21, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

4, Add the article The church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints to Wikipedia:Articles with the most references

5. Add [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Articles_requiring_reliable_medical_sources|this category to backlogs.

6. put {({External links|section|date=May 2026})} on the section "review behavior as a whole

This user is new to Wikipedia. Please assume good faith, remain civil, and be calm, patient, helpful, and polite while they become accustomed to Wikipedia and its intricacies.

I am confused about why my own account page is blocked. Any answers? The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 19:26, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Sitewide blocks generally apply to all pages minus the blocked user's talk page (for the purposes of appeals). User pages aren't a personal website, they exist to tell other Wikipedians about your edits, which, if you're blocked, you won't be doing any. CheeseAndJamSamdwich (talk) 19:31, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

As CheeseAndJamSamdwich notes, this is the only page on Wikipedia you're authorized to edit, and only productive conversations regarding your block. While blocked, discussing your block is your only involvement in the English Wikipedia project.

I've assisted a lot of editors to get back into good standing with the community, so I'm going to be absolutely frank about what you've been doing since you've been blocked. Writing a large block of text implying that the block itself is unjustified is not a successful approach to returning to editing. Focusing on when someone will review your unblock rather than on what your unblock says about you, your conduct, and how you will act in the future, is not a successful approach to returning to editing. Suggesting that other editors should be inappropriately WP:PROXYING you, and doing so within the actual unblock request, is not a successful approach to returning to editing.

While you are blocked, you would be best served by spending your Wikipedia time reviewing the various policies and guidelines linked for you, and elsewhere. Not to find some new argument or loophole that will get the unblock to go away, but to understand the responsibilities and conduct expected of every Wikipedia editor. Showing a real understanding of how English Wikipedia works, and the specific things you do to under that framework, will get you much farther in getting you unblocked than focusing on trying to getting unblocked as quickly as possible. It wouldn't do the project or you much good if you were unblocked while you have a foggy understanding of basic issues related to how Wikipedia works. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 08:52, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 17:09, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

May you please specify what policies, guidelines, and essays I should review, under what categories, how many of them, and how hard should I study the articles? The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 17:14, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

@The goat with a horn on his head: The last paragraph in @CoffeeCrumbs note above provides that guidance, for example, "reviewing the various policies and guidelines linked for you. (I take that to mean that it is recommended that you look through all of the warning and guidance messages on your talk page, and read the linked pages.) While reading the pages, keep an open mindset, quoting CoffeeCrumbs, don't look "to find some new argument or loophole that will get the unblock to go away, but to understand the responsibilities and conduct expected of every Wikipedia editor."

Given your responses above, I also recommend reading the essay Don't cite bite.

— ERcheck (talk) 17:18, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

• WP:RUNAWAY
• WP:DISRUPTSIGNS
• WP:ROPE
• WP:LASTCHANCE

The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 16:12, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

• WP:PATIENCE

The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 17:31, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Please try to abide by MOS:ENGVAR, and please write better edit summaries than . 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 22:01, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I guess I could not remember what I did. I will try harder next time. Also I was being a little silly. Thanks for the reminder thou. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 22:10, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

@The goat with a horn on his head - Your block has just been removed, and you return to silliness. "I guess I could not remember what I did," is not a good explanation, as the edit was made today. Please take this opportunity seriously, If you are making changes to a page, you need to have a reliable source and include a citation. Therefore, you should read WP:RS, WP:CITE, and WP:Edit summaries. We are hoping that the guidance you have been given will show in your contributions from here on into the future. — ERcheck (talk) 22:30, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Ok will do. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 22:31, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Also you included the content guideline Reliable Sources 2 times in that comment. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 22:33, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

@The goat with a horn on his head - Yes I did include RS twice. I included the WP:RS specifically so it might be easy to remember when you are wanting to review it. I find it helpful to find resources easily if I remember their shortcuts. — ERcheck (talk) 22:41, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Ah, I get the purpose of that know. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 22:44, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Additionally, your edit on the article Slavery introduced quite a few spelling mistakes. I assume you are editing quickly because you were just unblocked. Please try to take the time to ensure your edits improve the project before publishing them. Mistakes are allowed (and expected, to a certain extent) but introducing many causes a lot of editor time to be used up in the cleanup. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 22:26, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

The page Slavery never had a thing saying that it was in a certain variation of English, or I overlooked it. My mistake. The goat with a horn on his head (talk) 22:28, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

The talk page says that This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. The template {{Use Oxford spelling}} is also on the page. 45dogs (they/them) (talk page) (contributions) 22:29, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Puerto Ricans, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 01:23, 15 May 2026 (UTC)