Sam Dragovitch
August 2023
edit
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Nick-D (talk) 23:52, 12 August 2023 (UTC)- Hey mate, can I please be unblocked from editing? I know why you did it, fair enough, I won’t stuff around. There’s genuinely an accuracy edit I want to make regarding the westpac lifesaver rescue helicopter service page that I have personal insight on. I pinky promise I won’t vandalise it Sam Dragovitch (talk) 14:32, 20 May 2026 (UTC)
Sam Dragovitch (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)
Request reason:
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
- the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
- the block is no longer necessary because you
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. 331dot (talk) 06:24, 13 August 2023 (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.
Editing unblock?
editSam Dragovitch (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)
Request reason:
Hey mate, can I please be unblocked from editing? I know why you did it, fair enough, I won’t stuff around. There’s genuinely an accuracy edit I want to make regarding the westpac lifesaver rescue helicopter service page that I have personal insight on. I pinky promise I won’t vandalise it Sam Dragovitch (talk) 01:25, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
- the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
- the block is no longer necessary because you:
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:01, 22 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 missed that I had reviewed a prior request, so I removed my new review and will leave this for someone else to review. 331dot (talk) 08:35, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
Unblock
edit
Sam Dragovitch (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)
Request reason:
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.
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 don’t think your decline is fair. It was 3 years ago when I was being silly. I’ve already said I know why I was blocked when I said “I know why you did it”, then followed with “fair enough”, meaning the original reason for the block was warranted and understandable. Then I said “I won’t stuff around” and “I won’t do it again” meaning there is no threat of it happening again. Then I followed up with a positive contribution I wanted to make. I am literally ticking every single box you ask of. The block is not necessary as there is no risk of damage or vandalism. I understand why I was originally blocked, won’t do it again, and I also have a positive contribution. It’s been over 3 years, I think it’s well and truly long enough to where I can now be unblocked. I’ve even made donations to Wikipedia in the last 2 years when I got those emails. Be fair, and give me a chance [[User:Sam Dragovitch|Sam Dragovitch]] ([[User talk:Sam Dragovitch#top|talk]]) 02:57, 22 May 2026 (UTC) |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 don’t think your decline is fair. It was 3 years ago when I was being silly. I’ve already said I know why I was blocked when I said “I know why you did it”, then followed with “fair enough”, meaning the original reason for the block was warranted and understandable. Then I said “I won’t stuff around” and “I won’t do it again” meaning there is no threat of it happening again. Then I followed up with a positive contribution I wanted to make. I am literally ticking every single box you ask of. The block is not necessary as there is no risk of damage or vandalism. I understand why I was originally blocked, won’t do it again, and I also have a positive contribution. It’s been over 3 years, I think it’s well and truly long enough to where I can now be unblocked. I’ve even made donations to Wikipedia in the last 2 years when I got those emails. Be fair, and give me a chance [[User:Sam Dragovitch|Sam Dragovitch]] ([[User talk:Sam Dragovitch#top|talk]]) 02:57, 22 May 2026 (UTC) |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 don’t think your decline is fair. It was 3 years ago when I was being silly. I’ve already said I know why I was blocked when I said “I know why you did it”, then followed with “fair enough”, meaning the original reason for the block was warranted and understandable. Then I said “I won’t stuff around” and “I won’t do it again” meaning there is no threat of it happening again. Then I followed up with a positive contribution I wanted to make. I am literally ticking every single box you ask of. The block is not necessary as there is no risk of damage or vandalism. I understand why I was originally blocked, won’t do it again, and I also have a positive contribution. It’s been over 3 years, I think it’s well and truly long enough to where I can now be unblocked. I’ve even made donations to Wikipedia in the last 2 years when I got those emails. Be fair, and give me a chance [[User:Sam Dragovitch|Sam Dragovitch]] ([[User talk:Sam Dragovitch#top|talk]]) 02:57, 22 May 2026 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
Sam Dragovitch (talk) 02:57, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
- Sam, just because you say "I know why you did it" and "fair enough" it doesn't prove to us that you've actually understood the problem. I suggest that you elaborate on this point. We aren't looking for an apology, but something that convinces us that you've actually understood.
- It might help if you point out the actual problem in the helicopter rescue page and what edit you'd make if you were unblocked. Include a reliable reference if appropriate.
- Thank you for donating to Wikipedia, but that will have no bearing in this unblock request. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:21, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
- I understand it has no bearing on the request, and it shouldn’t have any affect, I’m just trying to show that I actually do value Wikipedia.
- I was blocked because when Australia won a match in the women’s soccer World Cup, I changed the Australian minister of defence to the Australian goal keeper. I was being silly with my friends and thought it was funny. But it also ruins what makes Wikipedia so good. Which is the vandalism reason.
- on the westpac lifesaver rescue helicopter service page, under the state of Victoria, it says we operate 2 helis, which is true, but it says they’re both for surveillance, which isn’t true. We have 1 x H135 (LS30) which is a winch rescue capable aircraft, but no camera. It has 1 pilot, 1 rescue swimmer, and 1 winch operator on board. The other heli (LS31) is a H120 I believe, not 100% sure, but it has a camera, and is used as a surveillance and search aircraft.
- the source is me, I work for LSV (Life Saving Victoria). My day to day role actively involves me working with, and communicating with, both LS30 and 31 for lifesaving operations across the state. My friends work on the helis.
- i was just being silly, 3 years ago, on a night out. I have positive contributions to make, and want to do the right thing. If I don’t, permanently ban me from everything forever, but give me a chance Sam Dragovitch (talk) 13:08, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
- Three follow up questions:
- When you say "
the source is me
", can you tell us how you think that would or would not align with WP:V and WP:RS? - And if you still felt you wanted to, how would you go about adding that information into the article today in a productive manner if you were unblocked?
- Would that constitute a WP:COI edit and how would you approach this in the future?
- When you say "
- I'll note you weren't banned because of promotional or COI editing, but given your remarks, I'm curious if you'd like to address it. Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk) 17:37, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
- I don’t think it would not align with the verifiably or reliable source policy as all the information I mentioned is public. It is on the microflite website, the company that owns the aircraft we use. It’s been published on news channels about rescues and new story’s for the helicopters. Although I am the one providing specific information about it, it can all be strengthened and backed up with publicly available sources outside of my personal experience and “word”.
- how would I go about editing it? I would just put the information to there in a clear, short piece of writing, make sure it made sense and was accurate, and then get external sources/links to verify it all. Although the information comes from me, provide multiple other sources to verify, I’m not just making it up. You can look up the registration numbers of the aircraft online, I have photos of them as well, microflite has a section on their website about the helicopters they supply and operate for us. LSV also has a page on their website about it, it’s not a secret or difficult to prove its accuracy.
- i don’t believe it violates the conflict of interest because I don’t stand to gain anything at all from changing it. It’s just a personal interest that I want to make it more accurate. I love our helicopter service, they do some awesome training and sketchy rescues. I have more accurate information on the specific topic than what is currently published to the public on Wikipedia and I want to fix that so anyone else who’s super interested on the service/topic as well can learn about it. I’m not being paid to edit it, no one knows I want to edit it, I’m not promoting anything, or trying to raise money/anything for the helicopter service or myself, all I want to do is correct the part where it fails to mention that the Victorian lifesaver rescue helicopter can conduct helicopter winches, as well as surveillance. The type of aircraft operated, and where they operate out of. Sam Dragovitch (talk) 10:28, 23 May 2026 (UTC)
- Three follow up questions: