User talk:Nerdboy8282

Welcome!

Hello, Nerdboy8282, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Norm The Genie, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at the our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

Article development
Standard layout
Lead section
How to write a great article
The perfect article
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions ask me on my talk page or you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Larryzhao123 (talk | contribs) 17:46, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Norm The Genie

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Norm The Genie, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Larryzhao123 (talk | contribs) 17:46, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help

I’m trying to redirect this Nerdboy8282 (talk) 17:47, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022

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 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. MOS:TVNOW wizzito | say hello! 20:33, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Very fancy, mb Nerdboy8282 (talk) 19:59, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Hermann Göring, you may be blocked from editing. Favonian (talk) 17:30, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

nah😂 😂 😂 Nerdboy8282 (talk) 17:31, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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 for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Spencer^T•C 17:39, 22 May 2023 (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).

Nerdboy8282 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hey! I admit I made some mistakes while on wikipedia and humbly request to be unblocked. I do not plan on doing it again and, if unblocked, understand that if I do do it again I will accept my punishment and be blocked for a much longer time. I love editing pages and I got carried away.

Decline reason:

I don't see any mistakes. I see deliberate destructive vandalism. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 18:16, 22 May 2023 (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'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).

Nerdboy8282 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Yes, and I apologize for any ill effects of this vandalism, and sincerely promise to it do them again. I take full responsibility for my actions and humbly request to be able to edit again. If you look at my old edits, for the most part, they are all sincere and valid

Decline reason:

"to it do them again"? Not sure that's what you meant but I don't like the sound of that. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:44, 23 May 2023 (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.

Apologies

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).

Nerdboy8282 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

No, I do not want to do them again. That was a grammar mistake. I am so sorry. To put it clearly, I will NOT do anything like that again

Decline reason:

Please describe what constructive edits you would make. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:46, 23 May 2023 (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.

Constructive edits

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).

Nerdboy8282 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I will continue to create valid edits to little-used Wikipedia pages and to add to entertainment pages. I love history and television and will edit pages of the like. Nerdboy8282 (talk) 15:01, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This unblock request has been declined due to your history of vandalism and/or disruption to this encyclopedia. However, we are willing to give you another chance provided that you can earn back the trust of the Wikipedia community. To be unblocked you need to demonstrate and confirm that you are willing and able to contribute positively to Wikipedia. You can do this by:

Familiarizing yourself with our basic rules.
Reading our guide to improving articles.
Picking any pre-existing article you wish to improve.
- If you have trouble choosing an article to improve, see this index of articles needing improvement for ideas.

Once you have decided on the article you will propose improvements to:

1. Click the Edit tab at the top of that article;
2. Copy the portion of the prose from that article that you will be proposing changes to. However:
  - do not copy the "infobox" from the start of the article (i.e., markup like this: {{infobox name|...}}),
  - do not copy any image placement code (i.e., markup like this: [[File:Name.jpg|thumb|caption]]),
  - do not copy the page's categories from the bottom of the page (i.e., markup like this: [[Category:Name]]),
  - and do not copy the stub tag (if there) from the bottom of the page (i.e., markup like this: {{Foo stub}});
3. Click edit at your talk page and paste at the bottom under a new section header (like this: == [[Article title]] ==) the copied content but do not save yet;
4. Place your cursor in the edit summary box and paste there an edit summary in the following form which specifies the name of the article you copied from and links to it (this is required for mandatory copyright attribution): "Copied content from [[exact Name of Article]]; see that article's history for attribution."
5. You can now save the page. However, if your edits will include any citations to reliable sources (which they should), add the following template to the end of your prose: {{reflist-talk}}. Once you have added the template, click Publish changes.
Now, edit that content. Propose significant and well researched improvements by editing the selected portion of the article. Please note that we are not looking for basic typo corrections, or small unreferenced additions; your edits should be substantial, and reflect relevant policies.
When you are done with your work, re-request unblocking using {{unblock}} and an administrator will review your proposed edits.
- If we (including the original blocking admin) are convinced that your proposed edits will hopefully improve Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, you will be unblocked.

If you need help while working with your proposed edits, you may add "{{Help me|your question here ~~~~}}" to your talk page. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 08:55, 24 May 2023 (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.

Jeff Jackson (politician)

During both the electoral process and his tenure as a Congressman, Jeff Jackson has used his TikTok account to keep both his constituents and the national public updated about policy issues and how The United States Congress works. His first video to garner national attention was explaining his first-hand account of the 2023 Speaker of the United States House of Representatives election. He experienced further publicity when he created a video to detail the national response to the Collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, calmly assuring his viewers that depositors at the bank would be made whole, without having to use taxpayer money. Furthermore, he has been outspoken against outrage journalism, sharing his experiences with politicians who employ "fake anger" and how the news media employs it to capture audiences. Jeff Jackson himself presents a calm demeanor in his videos, using a simple explanation of current events to inform his audience. ^[1] ^[2]

References

^ Rodríguez, Jesus. "The most-followed U.S. congressman on TikTok is doing a delicate dance". Washington Post. Retrieved 27 May 2023.
^ Hiti, Joe. "Freshman Congressman says his colleagues are 'perpetually outraged' and 'faking it' for TV". Audacy.

Unblock Request

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).

Nerdboy8282 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have followed the instructions given to me and created a substantial edit to the Tenure section of Congressman's Jeff Jacksons Wikipedia page. I respectfully request for my edits to be reviewed, and, if accepted, for me to be unblocked. Thank you

Decline reason:

The edit you've proposed is okay, but I think it's a bit soon after such clearly deliberate disruptive behavior to be considering an unblock. Maybe have a look at the standard offer. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:12, 4 June 2023 (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.

Nerdboy8282 (talk) 00:09, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have wanted to see you turn those references into inline citations (footnotes) as is normally required in articles about living people (and a desirable thing to do in any case). As for the sources, only the first one seems to be a solid reference. Axios is simply repeating some things from The Daily Beast and you should follow the link back to cite it, rather than Axios. The MSN video clip might be okay, but most of the time video clips make poor sources. As an editorial in a college newspaper, the last ref would most likely not be considered a reliable source. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:08, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have since updated my sources. Are these any bette? Nerdboy8282 (talk) 19:32, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You still needed the {{reflist talk}} template to keep the footnotes in the section. I've put that back in.

I think the references may be okay, as far as they go, but it seems like a stretch to write what you've written based on the content of those references. If this were a draft at Articles for Creation, the reviewers would want the footnotes to much more clearly indicate how each statement is tied to each source. For just one example, the comparison to FDR's fireside chats is included in the Audacy source as a vague attribution to "many" - that doesn't answer the "by whom?" question that naturally arises when you say "... having been compared to the fireside chats of Franklin Delano Roosevelt". If you want to include such a statement in the article, you'd be expected to find at least one writer who makes that comparison as their own opinion.

The amount of freedom you have as a humble Wikipedia editor is quite limited when you summarize a source to produce article content. It can be a hard adjustment to make if you are accustomed to more freewheeling styles of writing. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:01, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I’ll remove the sentence as it’s hard to justify it without a biased source. I really liked the comparison but I just can’t find a great source for it. Nerdboy8282 (talk) 13:40, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all the help by the way, you are really nice and have helped me a lot Nerdboy8282 (talk) 13:41, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Repeated unblock request

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).

Nerdboy8282 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Still requesting to be unblocked, I don’t know if any admins saw the last request but I have done as asked and proposed an edit to the Wikipedia page of Congressman Jeff Jackson

Decline reason:

Duplicate request. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:42, 3 June 2023 (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.

Nerdboy8282 (talk) 00:31, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #76453

is closed. . -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:38, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Under standard offer, not eligible till December 3 -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:40, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was blocked on May 22, so shouldn't it be November 22nd? Nerdboy8282 (talk) 21:25, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Nerdboy8282 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have waited until past December 3rd in obedience to the Standard Offer. I have followed all instructions given to me in the last sixth months without breaking any rules or making any other accounts. I understand I have made mistakes in the past, but I believe I have atoned over time.

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=I have waited until past December 3rd in obedience to the Standard Offer. I have followed all instructions given to me in the last sixth months without breaking any rules or making any other accounts. I understand I have made mistakes in the past, but I believe I have atoned over time. |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=I have waited until past December 3rd in obedience to the Standard Offer. I have followed all instructions given to me in the last sixth months without breaking any rules or making any other accounts. I understand I have made mistakes in the past, but I believe I have atoned over time. |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=I have waited until past December 3rd in obedience to the Standard Offer. I have followed all instructions given to me in the last sixth months without breaking any rules or making any other accounts. I understand I have made mistakes in the past, but I believe I have atoned over time. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Nerdboy8282 (talk) 04:35, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Rodríguez, Jesus. "The most-followed U.S. congressman on TikTok is doing a delicate dance". Washington Post. Retrieved 27 May 2023.

[2] Hiti, Joe. "Freshman Congressman says his colleagues are 'perpetually outraged' and 'faking it' for TV". Audacy.

[1]

[2]