User talk:DarkHorseMayhem

Hey!

I am gonna start putting out some new articles for the main space today, I have already done one and will put out another one sortly. My time has cleared up recently so I have more time. Thanks for all your help btw. HeinzMaster (talk) 21:06, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

John Gacy

Sorry. The Gacy article is a GA article. GA articles do not have references in the actual lede. Kieronoldham (talk) 23:42, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Where does it say that they dont have lede? DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 23:43, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As for your proposal for AfD, I'll maybe do it today, but really (and I mean seriously), I don't think one user solely acting on behalf of another's incentive is wise. A kind, benign, explanatory proposal on the April 27/27 April roster by yourself there would be best? I will add support.--Kieronoldham (talk) 00:15, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didnt mean to rush or anything my bad i just thought you seem to avoid when i asked, do it when or if you want, sorry for rushing you or if seems iam forcing you for anything DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 00:22, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not - not in the slightest - doing so. I would be happy to do so (of my own incentive too should I instinctively have chosen to do so), but you have given a clear path for one user to motivate another to do so and this negates integrity for the issue in question should the path for the contentious issue be traced as more than likely at least one guy/gal will oppose the gesture. I can and will add support for the submission. Rest assured there.--Kieronoldham (talk) 00:28, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 2025

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Drmies (talk) 20:34, 29 April 2025 (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).

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

Request reason:

I meant to ask user what was their problem in connection to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Lekkha_Moun#Hi i didn't mean to attack them or anything just to have convo about it it seems i come out too crude im sorryVanished user149 (talk) 20:36, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have chosen to vanish. As per WP:VANISH, this means you should be globally locked and have committed to never again editing Wikipedia. Is that not your intention? Please respond, or I will process a global lock on your behalf. Yamla (talk) 20:37, 29 April 2025 (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.

I don't know what you think you were doing on User:Knitsey's talk page, but I'm not going to let you do that. In addition, I don't understand what you're doing with that signature, with a redlinked user name. You need to fix that. Then, I need you to be more collegial in general, and show some decorum when you post. I also can't figure out what you are doing here: your last 50 edits are all to talk pages and noticeboards. User:Floquenbeam told you to " Stop. Fucking. Around." and I'm wondering if you had a hard time reading that, though you responded to it. Drmies (talk) 20:38, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I mean to ask user aboout post i linked it sounded like i was mianolute someone so i want to ask user why he think that i understand that way i express it wasnt good and im sorry for that i didnt mean to start any problem or anything, pls unblock me.Vanished user149 (talk) 20:43, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Note that your decision to vanish applies to you personally, including all declared and undeclared sockpuppet accounts. Now would be the time to declare your sock(s) so they can also be blocked. --Yamla (talk) 20:38, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I renamed my account today i have no other accounts i didnt know that is what vanish mean my bad just thought username sounds cool Vanished user149 (talk) 20:40, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is false. I know you have another account. Please also indicate whether (1) you wish your rename to be undone, or (2) you wish to keep this username and vanish as per WP:VANISH, in which case you are firmly committing to personally never edit Wikipedia again. You must pick one of these two options. --Yamla (talk) 20:41, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I dont have another account i renamed my account from DarkHorseMayhem to Vanished user 149 today. Vanished user149 (talk) 20:44, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One last chance. Pick whether you wish your rename to be undone or whether you wish your accounts to be globally locked. Your next edit must make that choice. --Yamla (talk) 20:46, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will rename my account no problem but again i dont have another account not sure what i need to do to prove it to you Vanished user149 (talk) 20:47, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will rename your account and block your sockpuppet account, MayhemLeviathen. --Yamla (talk) 20:48, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't make that account i swear to everything that was auto made or something i didn't make that DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 20:52, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The logs say, "2023-03-21T16:12:41 User account MayhemLeviathen talk contribs block was created by DarkHorseMayhem talk contribs block (To edit freely)". If you didn't create it, you won't mind that it is blocked. And as you see, I've undone your rename. --Yamla (talk) 20:53, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah i dont mind being it blocked but i dont want you thinking i created something against the rules that i simple didnt create DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 20:55, 29 April 2025 (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).

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

Request reason:

As i said in previous review i didnt mean to attack anyone or start anything i simple wanted to ask user why he made that assumption again i know i came as aggressive that wasnt my intention and im sorry pls unblock me i will be better and will change

Decline reason:

Procedural decline; superseded by new block and new unblock request below. Yamla (talk) 21:33, 29 April 2025 (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 have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 21:25, 29 April 2025 (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).

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

Request reason:

Look im not native english speaker and i know that some things i said dont make sense, i did bunch of dummy indeed that a mistake that shouldn't happen and im sorry for that if you look at my early backlog i edited pages and helped with them in no way shape or form i come to Wikipedia to cause vanadalisim and not build anything. Mistakes i did are stupid and careless and should never happen im asking you to give me one more chance to show that i indeed want to build encyclopedia and not to ruin it, again im sorry for things i did. DarkHorseMayhem (talk) 21:32, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I don't think the encyclopedia would benefit from this. I'll prevent further appeals for a month. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:09, 29 April 2025 (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.

Talk page access removed for now

Hello DarkHorseMayhem, please take a month off, at least. The guide to appealing blocks contains all instructions you need now and in a month. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:14, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Feel free to edit other Wikipedias than the English one. The block applies only to the English Wikipedia. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:15, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your email, the answer is no. --Yamla (talk) 10:13, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As a result of the death threat you sent to me via email, I have revoked your talk page access and your email access. I will oppose any future unblock request from you. --Yamla (talk) 11:23, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the Unblock Ticket Request System that have been declined leading to the posting of this notice.