User talk:Dahawk04

Archives

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 30 days are automatically archived by if there are more than 5.

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Dahawk04. Thank you for your work on Saint Anne's Hospital (Fall River, Massachusetts). Another editor, Klbrain, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for creating this well-developed and referenced article for the this hospital, coming up to its 120th year. It's clear and appropriately linked.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Klbrain}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Klbrain (talk) 15:46, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

Hi all, thanks for reading.

I’d like to ask for a review of the indefinite block on my account. I understand why it was applied: some of my earlier edits included inaccurate citations, and I take responsibility for that.

A few points about what I’ve done and how I’ll proceed:

I did use an LLM in the past and I think that contributed to the bad citations. I stopped using LLMs before the complaints were made.
I’ve tried to go back and corrected the problematic edits where I could, removing or replacing inaccurate citations with verifiable sources and will continue to review previous edits.
A recent reviewer left this note about my work: “Thank you for creating this well-developed and referenced article for the this hospital, coming up to its 120th year. It's clear and appropriately linked.” I’m including that to show I’m trying to make useful, verifiable contributions.
From now on I’ll only add material I can back up with reliable sources. For any non-trivial changes I’ll either put a draft in my userspace/sandbox or use the edit request process so others can check my work first.

I’m willing to accept whatever probationary arrangement the admins think appropriate to demonstrate I can contribute responsibly.

I’m sorry to the editors who had to clean up my mistakes. I want to be a constructive volunteer here and help improve Wikipedia. I’d appreciate the chance to show, through verifiable edits and by following community processes, that I’ve learned from this.

Thanks for considering this.

— Dahawk04 (talk) 13:20, 18 October 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).

Dahawk04 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I accept responsibility for earlier edits that included inaccurate citations; I stopped using LLMs before complaints were raised and have corrected the problematic edits. A reviewer recently wrote: "Thank you for creating this well-developed and referenced article for the this hospital, coming up to its 120th year. It's clear and appropriately linked." I will follow WP best practices and use only verifiable source while I rebuild trust. Dahawk04 (talk) 13:20, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As was stated above, you are only partially blocked. You are still able to edit talk pages and create drafts. However, you have not done either since your block was enacted. As the adage goes, "Actions speak louder than words." I recommend editing in the draftspace or recommending edits on talk pages to show you will not cause further disruption to Wikipedia if unblocked. Thank you! Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 17:04, 18 October 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.

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. 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 2025 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) 00:46, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Dahawk04. Thank you for your work on Armstrong Ambulance. Another editor, Klbrain, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for creating this page on a private ambulance service business that has a long history, stretching back almost 80 years. It might be helpful to expand the history of the late 20th century (there is a bit of a gap after its founding) and to given more biographical information about Bill.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Klbrain}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Klbrain (talk) 06:08, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]