Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first. A review of the archives indicates that you have not changed your attitude or tone in over two years; you are confrontational when criticised, and resort to calling other editors trolls, and justify your actions as being correct (and the charming habit of forbidding editors to continue posting on your page with content you do not wish to read). Since you seem unwilling to moderate your attitude, I have removed your editing privileges. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 01:01, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Okay, since I can't leave this message on your talk page, I shall do it here and hope that you read it. I'll be the first to admit that I haven't been the easiest person to get along with and yes, I have been unnecessarily combative at times. Was that any justification for an automatic block? Absolutely not. First of all, the AN/I report here should not have been considered, as it was made under absolutely false pretenses, as I stated in my response to the charges. The user in question said I was trolling the page- I wasn't. The user said I restored a comment he had deleted for no justified reason- I had one, and I presented it to him once asked for it. He did not want to consider my reasoning, based solely on his bias toward the website it came from. The use of the term "sore loser", as it were, came into play because he was conducting himself with a rather snotty and condescending attitude that I did not appreciate and told him as such, making the point that his refusal to consider the other side of the argument made him seem petty. He called me delusional for pointing out that he had not waited for consensus on the dispute before removing the cited statement from the page. His motives made little to no sense, as he didn't give me any clear indication why he would think the way he did. Had he done so, we wouldn't have had the problem we had had.
This user also lied in regards to the message I left to the anonymous IP he cited. I never threatened to ban anyone or do anything to anyone at my discretion- nor would I considering I do not possess that power. I took the IP's opinion with quite a grain of salt, as a check of its user contributions revealed a rather long trail of disruptive editing and at least one suspension for said editing, and told him that if it continued, he would be blocked again. At no point did I say I was going to be the one doing the blocking- again, I do not possess that power, so why would I threaten to use it?
He also made an assumption about my editing habits that was completely false and damaging, without understanding a couple of things. One, that after I was warned to stop, in all cases but one I STOPPED. Second, I HAVE been punished for it before. His declaration that if he was forced to interact with me again should've given you an even larger clue as to the motives behind his claim filing, as well as his contradictory statement about lies "making his blood boil", as he did not have a problem lying about me.
I've never forbidden anyone from talking on my talk page. Never. However, I will admit to have made statements concerning continued disputes on my talk page that might be construed as such. However, noticing this block I must say you wouldn't consider the reasoning behind that- that maybe, just maybe, the discussion isn't going anywhere and I don't want to continue it any further than it's already gone. I've been harassed WAY too many times by people on this website over the years and in at least one case feared for my personal safety because of it, so you might excuse me if I've grown a little less considerate of heated discussions over the time.-- ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 04:33, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
ChrisP2K5 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
While admitting a combative attitude in some editing over the years that I have been a Wiki member and that in 99.9% of those cases it was unnecessary, reason why the block was considered was made under false pretenses. User in question User:Martin_IIIa told various lies about a dispute he and I were having over a bit of information on a video game article's page (the full dispute can be found here). The dispute came about after I called into question an anonymous IP's assertion agreeing with said lying user due to his long history of disruptive editing which included at least one block that I was aware of. Admittedly, perhaps my response to the AN/I was not the best possible way to vent my frustrations with the out and out lying and personal attacks by the lying user in question, but my point still stands. It was completely unfair to extend an indefinite block to me, especially considering that a) I have not been in very many disputes, b) I have for the most part cooperated when directed to do so, and c) the AN/I was made under false pretenses. If I earn a block so be it but there was absolutely no need for it to be an indefinite block. Especially considering all the positive edits I've made have more than outweighed that.
Decline reason:
First, WP:NOTTHEM applies quite clearly. If you're going to continue to make aggressive comments against another user in even your unblock request, it's never going to go well. Your reply in WP:ANI - your chance to explain your actions and possibly avoid a block - was dismissive, and unhelpful to anyone who wished to investigate. Why not read WP:GAB again, and rethink your interactions with others: when faced with someone that you consider to be a WP:DICK, your best option (and the higher road) is to ignore and/or back away. ( talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:01, 10 April 2010 (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.
What does bother me, though, is that my position that the ANI and block was made due to the lies of Martin_IIIa regarding our little dispute was not even considered and that he won't face any punishment for his damaging and (at least in one or two of his point) potentially slanderous statements. It's not an excuse but it is troubling. -- ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 20:06, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
ChrisP2K5 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Considering my original reasoning (which can be found on my user talk page with my original unblock request) was found to be in violation of WP:NOTTHEM, contesting again based on that. Upon seeing this linked I reviewed NOTTHEM and saw that my actions that were alleged would not have disrupted anything if I had taken said actions, which I obviously did not do to the level that I had been accused of doing in the first place. As far as assuming good faith, considering previous interactions that I had had with the user that had filed the report (including the discussion we had had on the discussion page for the article in question), considering that my position was not considered, my opinions summarily dismissed as "trolling" and "delusional", and the vote of two people (one who isn't even a registered user) being declared "a majority consensus" when Wiki guidelines require more to have consensus declared, it was difficult to assume good faith in the ANI post because of the past disagreement and the unwillingness of one side to assume good faith when I had bent over backwards to try to understand a point the side in question never made an effort to make clear. As I said in my response to the ANI, the report was a misconstruing of my words and actions in this case and did not accurately reflect what actually had taken place. Perhaps my response could've been a little more tactful but I wasn't expecting to be punished for something that, even if the depths of it hadn't been embellished by the filer, would not have been in any way disruptive to the Wiki. And I CERTAINLY wasn't expecting an indefinite block for it. Regardless of who is more at fault, though, this was a simple misunderstanding and it definitely did not warrant the punishment that was handed down.
Decline reason:
Per user's truculence below and comment about the block being for multiple issues. — Daniel Case ( talk) 13:26, 14 April 2010 (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.
ChrisP2K5 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Have had several attempts to restore my posting privileges from this block go ignored, including an email sent to the Appeals Subcommittee, so trying again nearly two months later. While I have not agreed with the block and have shown in several instances where the user whose report initiated the block proceedings lied in his report, I have also admitted that I have not always been fully civil in disputes with users and have made several promises to change that have also gone ignored, even though in at least one case I was promised to have my privileges restored if I apologized (see above requests). My positive contributions have more than outweighed any negativity that I've brought to the Wiki and I believe that should be more than enough reason to reinstate my privileges.
Decline reason:
At this point, you may be eligible for WP:OFFER in a few more months - ensure that you do not WP:EVADE, WP:SOCK, or make other edits for a full 6 months before then. At that point, you will have to clearly show that your behaviour will not return. Clearly, asking us to unblock again after a negative or nil response from Appeals Subcommittee is WP:FORUMSHOP ( talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:12, 29 May 2010 (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.
Alright, guys, I give up. Please delete my account, as it's become blatantly obvious that you will never consider my position even though I've made it clear three times. I SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN BLOCKED. The user who got me blocked LIED to get me blocked. The entire thing was based on an assumption of bad faith BY HIM on edits I made and his anger that I called him on it. My block, despite what you people are telling me, was punitive. It's become clear that bad faith users and trolls are going to be given preference over actual, good users of the Wiki and I no longer wish to be part of it. I note that there never was an investigation into User:Martin_IIIa's conduct, especially the suspicion that I was unable to raise after my block- that he, in fact, was behind the anonymous IP that declared consensus on the Kasumi Ninja vote when four people did not vote definitively and the IP was not a moderator and therefore unable to declare consensus. So please delete my account and this talk page, the sooner the better. If this is the way Wikipedia is going to treat its members then I don't understand continuing to be a part. -- ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 18:52, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
ChrisP2K5 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Same reasons as three previous requests made above this one, plus refusal by moderators to consider my positions that user Martin_IIIa lied and slandered my name- which thanks to the block I can neither address nor respond to. Request review from mod other than BWilkins as I don't believe said user is being impartial.
Decline reason:
Here is the reasoning recorded in the block log: Disruptive editing: WP:BATTLE mentality, calling most who criticise "trolls" and confontational attitude generally. If you could address those issues in your next unblock request that would be helpful. If you do not it is likely the next reviewing admin will revoke your ability to edit this page and your only remaining avenue will be to again email arbcom. I would add that your above statement "IIRC, anonymous IPs cannot vote on whether things should or shouldn't be accepted " is directly contrary to Wikipedia policy on open editing, and you made up the thing about four votes out of thin air, there's no policy that says that and it's not a vote anyway. Frankly you don't seem to have a very firm grasp of how Wikipedia works despite your long tenure here. Wikipedia is not for everyone, some people simply can't get along in this environment. You may want to consider the possibility that you are such a person. Beeblebrox ( talk) 07:06, 3 June 2010 (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.
Easy there, Beeblebrox. First of all, I had addressed the so-called "battle mentality" in my first unblock request (which, as I note, is still here) and do not agree entirely with the assessment given. I have addressed my confrontational attitude and have admitted that perhaps I have gone overboard at times. I don't understand why I need to keep addressing points that I already have addressed in previous unblock requests. It's not like I've deleted the requests and violated the rule that says you can't- it is all here, just as it's been left.
As far as your calling my statement "directly contradictory to open editing", I think you're jumping the gun a little bit and assuming a little too much about why I said that. It was my understanding that, when there was a disputed piece of information on a page there needed to be a consensus reached among registered users as to whether or not the information should stand. But since I wasn't sure of that, I put IIRC into my statement just in case I was wrong. Obviously I was. I also don't appreciate your last statement, as I have been more than able to get along with most editors on Wikipedia. There have been rare instances that I haven't, and in every case but two I've conceded my wrongdoing and acknowledged that I hadn't done what I should have. The two instances where that hasn't happened was with User:Hdayejr, with whom I was actually fearing for my personal safety because of the lengths he has gone to to try and deal with certain people, and the most recent with User:Martin_IIIa when he made the report full of lies that I just did not feel was right. I think if you went back through every single edit I've made you'd find that the problems are far outweighed by all the good I've done, and quite frankly I find it insulting that you would say I "simply can't get along in this environment" because I have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that I can. I would appreciate a response. -- ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 21:02, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello ChrisP2K5! Thank you for your contributions. I am a
bot notifying you on behalf of the
the unreferenced biographies team that 3 of the articles that you created are currently tagged as
Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The
biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure
verifiability, all biographies should be based on
reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current
824 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{
unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
Thanks!-- DASHBot ( talk) 09:04, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
ChrisP2K5 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Over a year has passed since I was blocked, and perhaps it is time that I was unblocked. A lot has changed over the last year and I believe that, since I haven't made any effort to cause trouble since, it warrants a restoration of my posting privileges. ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 01:46, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I am willing to believe that, after more than a year, you may have changed. However, merely stating that "a lot has changed" without specifying what has changed is not enough. I strongly suggest that you respond to the question below if you wish to make another unblock request. JamesBWatson ( talk) 10:41, 26 September 2011 (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.
1) I was blocked for what was said to be a continued "battle" mentality (which I though was a little extreme although I have had disputes with other users in the past). However, the block did not come until a user fabricated things about me and I was not willing to participate in the AN/I he filed against me because of that. The user used terminology in that post that I had been warned not to use (such as the term "troll") and held a condescending air about the whole thing claiming he would not be civil toward me in any way. He also said that I threatened another user (which I did not do) and refused to consider his position on something (which I had, but couldn't agree with because his position wasn't making any sense). Would the block have been inevitable regardless? I don't know. I just felt that THAT particular thing being the linchpin was totally unfair. You can look up on the top for the entire exchange- I kept it there for a reason.
2) Simple: don't engage in the same crap I did before.
3) What's basically the same editing I believed I was always engaging in: adding relevant information to the wiki, improving articles by adding said information, and overall contributing positively to the wiki.
Truthfully I was not expecting to have to answer any questions because I figured I'd served my time and that my reinstatement should've been automatic. However, I understand the reasons why I was asked and hope that my answers will grant me reinstatement. Like I said, a lot has changed and I want to get back into contributing to the wiki- which is really all I was here for to begin with. I wasn't here to cause trouble...trouble just seemed to find me and I reacted in not so good ways. -- ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 03:25, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
ChrisP2K5 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Addressed questions asked by MasterofPuppets, as per request of JamesBWatson. Also reiterating that much has changed, I have served my block for over a year, and believe that I am worthy of being reinstated. -- ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 03:25, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Accept reason:
Consider me a believer. Be free, and tread lightly! m.o.p 05:20, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article
The $128,000 Question, please cite a
reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of
verifiability. See
Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the
welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
WikiLubber (
talk)
21:03, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:40, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Please take a some time to review the guidelines for use of hyphens vs. dashes listed in MOS:DASH. Your last edits to Michael Larsen included several hyphens instead of dashes. Sottolacqua ( talk) 12:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Also, you've been asked to provide sources with your edits, but your changes to Press Your Luck in this edit contains no sourced information for your additions. Please provide the required backup to your edits. Sottolacqua ( talk) 14:25, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at
Press Your Luck, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice. Last warning. Please do not remove maintenance templates requesting citations or replace proper dashes with hyphens as you did in
this edit Sottolacqua (
talk)
23:37, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Happy Harry's, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Drugstore ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:12, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fort McMurray Team is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fort McMurray Team until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Zzaffuto118 ( talk) 05:02, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Big Gold Belt, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages No Way Out, Money in the Bank and Backlash ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:03, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Timothy J. Mara requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Zzarch ( talk) 09:05, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:38, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:57, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Super Bowl XLVI, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Victor Cruz ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:33, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited 1986 World Series, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kevin Mitchell and Marty Barrett ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:29, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Wayne-Route 23 (NJT station), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Willowbrook Mall ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:49, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at
Quiz Kids Challenge. Your edits appear to be unconstructive and have been
reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. Thank you.
WikiLubber (
talk)
22:57, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited SuperBrawl, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Junkyard Dog ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:16, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited WABC-TV, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Scrubs and Peter Marshall ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:28, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I'm having difficulty understanding your edit with regard to WXYZ-TV in the Action News table of stations that have used the name or format:
Used since 1972, but is more Action News in name only since most of WKYZ's broadcasts use Eyewitness News-style branding that ABC O&O's use (since it once was one), such as the circle 7 logo and "Cool Hand Luke"-based themes
Could you please explain what you mean by "more Action News in name only" and define "Eyewitness News-style branding"? This is unclear and puts too much information in one box of a table. If there's a difference between using the Action News name and the Action News format, this should be explained in more detail somewhere else. Thanks. JTRH ( talk) 10:52, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited King of the Ring (2010), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Hennigan ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:40, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Money in the Bank ladder match, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Big Show ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:29, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at
Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego? (game show). Your edits appear to be unconstructive and have been
reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. Thank you.
DawgDeputy (
talk)
12:59, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Please stop adding
unsourced content, as you did to
Squidward Tentacles. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on
verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be
blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Otterathome (
talk)
11:59, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ShopRite ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 13:39, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
You suggested that this article needs to be split. When I tried to split the article, I found there was in practice very little apparant material on Cinemassacre or James Rolfe to make the split. Would you consider making the split? Op47 ( talk) 22:00, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
If you'd like, sure I will.-- ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 01:34, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited 1991 Budweiser at The Glen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page STP ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 03:37, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:07, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
One of the pages you have created, Prime Time Begins at 7:30, is in the process of being deleted. You are invited to join a debate on whether this article can remain here. Thank you. Freshh ( talk) 19:46, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kevin Kugler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Thompson ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:51, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:33, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lash Huffman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vader ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:50, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hakeem Olajuwon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spalding ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:53, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited SportsNation (TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page KSPN ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:22, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Windham Rotunda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Nexus ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:03, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
The article Tide Ride has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
The Bushranger
One ping only
05:11, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Acme Fresh Market, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albertsons ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:43, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:28, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Williams F1, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Italian ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:17, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you
vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at
Arsenal F.C., you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
Walter Görlitz (
talk)
14:06, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
I'd sure like to know how posting an event from the Elementary episode titled "A Landmark Story" to the Arsenal F.C. qualifies as vandalism. I appreciate your concerns but do not tolerate being falsely accused of vandalizing pages. What I did was not vandalism. Could it be classified perhaps as unsourced/trivial info, perhaps. But to out and out accuse me of vandalizing a page is something I might be tempted to report to the AN/I board if it happens again. -- ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 06:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Buster Douglas vs. Evander Holyfield, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cruiserweight ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 13:53, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Who Wants to Be a Millionaire (U.S. game show), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Orange ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:45, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Richard Green (referee), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greg Page ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:22, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Please do not add
original research or
novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to
The Price Is Right (U.S. game show). Please cite a
reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. You did not include a source for the second half in your edit "In 1973 CBS moved TPIR to 3pm, pairing it with
Match Game as part of what became the highest rated pairing in daytime."
AldezD (
talk)
15:01, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Beef 'O' Brady's Bowl may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 07:12, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Who Wants to Be a Millionaire (U.S. game show) may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 07:39, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
The task of creating a page for Timothy J. Mara had been on my to-do list for about two years. Because I work during the day and attend school at night, it's been on the back burner. I saw today that you had written one -- very nicely done. And thanks again -- he needed a page. He's kind of a forgotten owner to people born after 1985 or so. Kjscotte34 ( talk) 14:58, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Grand Union (supermarket), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages CVS, ShopRite and Hannaford ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:02, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sex Wars (game show), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:55, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Survivor Series (1994), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tatanka ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:01, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Lingo (U.S. game show). Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. -- Musdan77 ( talk) 17:43, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Lehigh Valley Phantoms may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 07:18, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Musdan77 ( talk) 01:20, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Season 5 did not begin with Big Month of Cash. That didn't start until October. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 08:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New York Mets, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WINS ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:53, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Please stop adding
unsourced content, as you did to
The Joker's Wild. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on
verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be
blocked from editing Wikipedia.
[1]
AldezD (
talk)
02:39, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at
The Joker's Wild.
[2]
AldezD (
talk)
01:01, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
AldezD (
talk)
06:31, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello. I see that you made an undiscussed move (and some other significant edits) of the Bernie Robbins Stadium article. You may not have noticed that the naming of this article had already been discussed extensively, as recorded on the Talk page at Talk:Bernie Robbins Stadium. The decision resulting from those prior discussions has been to keep the article at Bernie Robbins Stadium. Your edits did not seem to add any significant new information to the article – e.g., no new sources indicating that the situation has substantially changed. I have therefore reverted your changes. Please do not repeat this action without submitting a formal move request to determine whether there is a consensus to make those changes. You can find the instructions for how to submit a move request at WP:RM. It would also be helpful if you could find some new reliable sources to cite in the article, if the situation has changed. — BarrelProof ( talk) 16:33, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first. A review of the archives indicates that you have not changed your attitude or tone in over two years; you are confrontational when criticised, and resort to calling other editors trolls, and justify your actions as being correct (and the charming habit of forbidding editors to continue posting on your page with content you do not wish to read). Since you seem unwilling to moderate your attitude, I have removed your editing privileges. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 01:01, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Okay, since I can't leave this message on your talk page, I shall do it here and hope that you read it. I'll be the first to admit that I haven't been the easiest person to get along with and yes, I have been unnecessarily combative at times. Was that any justification for an automatic block? Absolutely not. First of all, the AN/I report here should not have been considered, as it was made under absolutely false pretenses, as I stated in my response to the charges. The user in question said I was trolling the page- I wasn't. The user said I restored a comment he had deleted for no justified reason- I had one, and I presented it to him once asked for it. He did not want to consider my reasoning, based solely on his bias toward the website it came from. The use of the term "sore loser", as it were, came into play because he was conducting himself with a rather snotty and condescending attitude that I did not appreciate and told him as such, making the point that his refusal to consider the other side of the argument made him seem petty. He called me delusional for pointing out that he had not waited for consensus on the dispute before removing the cited statement from the page. His motives made little to no sense, as he didn't give me any clear indication why he would think the way he did. Had he done so, we wouldn't have had the problem we had had.
This user also lied in regards to the message I left to the anonymous IP he cited. I never threatened to ban anyone or do anything to anyone at my discretion- nor would I considering I do not possess that power. I took the IP's opinion with quite a grain of salt, as a check of its user contributions revealed a rather long trail of disruptive editing and at least one suspension for said editing, and told him that if it continued, he would be blocked again. At no point did I say I was going to be the one doing the blocking- again, I do not possess that power, so why would I threaten to use it?
He also made an assumption about my editing habits that was completely false and damaging, without understanding a couple of things. One, that after I was warned to stop, in all cases but one I STOPPED. Second, I HAVE been punished for it before. His declaration that if he was forced to interact with me again should've given you an even larger clue as to the motives behind his claim filing, as well as his contradictory statement about lies "making his blood boil", as he did not have a problem lying about me.
I've never forbidden anyone from talking on my talk page. Never. However, I will admit to have made statements concerning continued disputes on my talk page that might be construed as such. However, noticing this block I must say you wouldn't consider the reasoning behind that- that maybe, just maybe, the discussion isn't going anywhere and I don't want to continue it any further than it's already gone. I've been harassed WAY too many times by people on this website over the years and in at least one case feared for my personal safety because of it, so you might excuse me if I've grown a little less considerate of heated discussions over the time.-- ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 04:33, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
ChrisP2K5 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
While admitting a combative attitude in some editing over the years that I have been a Wiki member and that in 99.9% of those cases it was unnecessary, reason why the block was considered was made under false pretenses. User in question User:Martin_IIIa told various lies about a dispute he and I were having over a bit of information on a video game article's page (the full dispute can be found here). The dispute came about after I called into question an anonymous IP's assertion agreeing with said lying user due to his long history of disruptive editing which included at least one block that I was aware of. Admittedly, perhaps my response to the AN/I was not the best possible way to vent my frustrations with the out and out lying and personal attacks by the lying user in question, but my point still stands. It was completely unfair to extend an indefinite block to me, especially considering that a) I have not been in very many disputes, b) I have for the most part cooperated when directed to do so, and c) the AN/I was made under false pretenses. If I earn a block so be it but there was absolutely no need for it to be an indefinite block. Especially considering all the positive edits I've made have more than outweighed that.
Decline reason:
First, WP:NOTTHEM applies quite clearly. If you're going to continue to make aggressive comments against another user in even your unblock request, it's never going to go well. Your reply in WP:ANI - your chance to explain your actions and possibly avoid a block - was dismissive, and unhelpful to anyone who wished to investigate. Why not read WP:GAB again, and rethink your interactions with others: when faced with someone that you consider to be a WP:DICK, your best option (and the higher road) is to ignore and/or back away. ( talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:01, 10 April 2010 (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.
What does bother me, though, is that my position that the ANI and block was made due to the lies of Martin_IIIa regarding our little dispute was not even considered and that he won't face any punishment for his damaging and (at least in one or two of his point) potentially slanderous statements. It's not an excuse but it is troubling. -- ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 20:06, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
ChrisP2K5 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Considering my original reasoning (which can be found on my user talk page with my original unblock request) was found to be in violation of WP:NOTTHEM, contesting again based on that. Upon seeing this linked I reviewed NOTTHEM and saw that my actions that were alleged would not have disrupted anything if I had taken said actions, which I obviously did not do to the level that I had been accused of doing in the first place. As far as assuming good faith, considering previous interactions that I had had with the user that had filed the report (including the discussion we had had on the discussion page for the article in question), considering that my position was not considered, my opinions summarily dismissed as "trolling" and "delusional", and the vote of two people (one who isn't even a registered user) being declared "a majority consensus" when Wiki guidelines require more to have consensus declared, it was difficult to assume good faith in the ANI post because of the past disagreement and the unwillingness of one side to assume good faith when I had bent over backwards to try to understand a point the side in question never made an effort to make clear. As I said in my response to the ANI, the report was a misconstruing of my words and actions in this case and did not accurately reflect what actually had taken place. Perhaps my response could've been a little more tactful but I wasn't expecting to be punished for something that, even if the depths of it hadn't been embellished by the filer, would not have been in any way disruptive to the Wiki. And I CERTAINLY wasn't expecting an indefinite block for it. Regardless of who is more at fault, though, this was a simple misunderstanding and it definitely did not warrant the punishment that was handed down.
Decline reason:
Per user's truculence below and comment about the block being for multiple issues. — Daniel Case ( talk) 13:26, 14 April 2010 (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.
ChrisP2K5 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Have had several attempts to restore my posting privileges from this block go ignored, including an email sent to the Appeals Subcommittee, so trying again nearly two months later. While I have not agreed with the block and have shown in several instances where the user whose report initiated the block proceedings lied in his report, I have also admitted that I have not always been fully civil in disputes with users and have made several promises to change that have also gone ignored, even though in at least one case I was promised to have my privileges restored if I apologized (see above requests). My positive contributions have more than outweighed any negativity that I've brought to the Wiki and I believe that should be more than enough reason to reinstate my privileges.
Decline reason:
At this point, you may be eligible for WP:OFFER in a few more months - ensure that you do not WP:EVADE, WP:SOCK, or make other edits for a full 6 months before then. At that point, you will have to clearly show that your behaviour will not return. Clearly, asking us to unblock again after a negative or nil response from Appeals Subcommittee is WP:FORUMSHOP ( talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:12, 29 May 2010 (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.
Alright, guys, I give up. Please delete my account, as it's become blatantly obvious that you will never consider my position even though I've made it clear three times. I SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN BLOCKED. The user who got me blocked LIED to get me blocked. The entire thing was based on an assumption of bad faith BY HIM on edits I made and his anger that I called him on it. My block, despite what you people are telling me, was punitive. It's become clear that bad faith users and trolls are going to be given preference over actual, good users of the Wiki and I no longer wish to be part of it. I note that there never was an investigation into User:Martin_IIIa's conduct, especially the suspicion that I was unable to raise after my block- that he, in fact, was behind the anonymous IP that declared consensus on the Kasumi Ninja vote when four people did not vote definitively and the IP was not a moderator and therefore unable to declare consensus. So please delete my account and this talk page, the sooner the better. If this is the way Wikipedia is going to treat its members then I don't understand continuing to be a part. -- ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 18:52, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
ChrisP2K5 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Same reasons as three previous requests made above this one, plus refusal by moderators to consider my positions that user Martin_IIIa lied and slandered my name- which thanks to the block I can neither address nor respond to. Request review from mod other than BWilkins as I don't believe said user is being impartial.
Decline reason:
Here is the reasoning recorded in the block log: Disruptive editing: WP:BATTLE mentality, calling most who criticise "trolls" and confontational attitude generally. If you could address those issues in your next unblock request that would be helpful. If you do not it is likely the next reviewing admin will revoke your ability to edit this page and your only remaining avenue will be to again email arbcom. I would add that your above statement "IIRC, anonymous IPs cannot vote on whether things should or shouldn't be accepted " is directly contrary to Wikipedia policy on open editing, and you made up the thing about four votes out of thin air, there's no policy that says that and it's not a vote anyway. Frankly you don't seem to have a very firm grasp of how Wikipedia works despite your long tenure here. Wikipedia is not for everyone, some people simply can't get along in this environment. You may want to consider the possibility that you are such a person. Beeblebrox ( talk) 07:06, 3 June 2010 (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.
Easy there, Beeblebrox. First of all, I had addressed the so-called "battle mentality" in my first unblock request (which, as I note, is still here) and do not agree entirely with the assessment given. I have addressed my confrontational attitude and have admitted that perhaps I have gone overboard at times. I don't understand why I need to keep addressing points that I already have addressed in previous unblock requests. It's not like I've deleted the requests and violated the rule that says you can't- it is all here, just as it's been left.
As far as your calling my statement "directly contradictory to open editing", I think you're jumping the gun a little bit and assuming a little too much about why I said that. It was my understanding that, when there was a disputed piece of information on a page there needed to be a consensus reached among registered users as to whether or not the information should stand. But since I wasn't sure of that, I put IIRC into my statement just in case I was wrong. Obviously I was. I also don't appreciate your last statement, as I have been more than able to get along with most editors on Wikipedia. There have been rare instances that I haven't, and in every case but two I've conceded my wrongdoing and acknowledged that I hadn't done what I should have. The two instances where that hasn't happened was with User:Hdayejr, with whom I was actually fearing for my personal safety because of the lengths he has gone to to try and deal with certain people, and the most recent with User:Martin_IIIa when he made the report full of lies that I just did not feel was right. I think if you went back through every single edit I've made you'd find that the problems are far outweighed by all the good I've done, and quite frankly I find it insulting that you would say I "simply can't get along in this environment" because I have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that I can. I would appreciate a response. -- ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 21:02, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello ChrisP2K5! Thank you for your contributions. I am a
bot notifying you on behalf of the
the unreferenced biographies team that 3 of the articles that you created are currently tagged as
Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The
biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure
verifiability, all biographies should be based on
reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current
824 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{
unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
Thanks!-- DASHBot ( talk) 09:04, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
ChrisP2K5 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Over a year has passed since I was blocked, and perhaps it is time that I was unblocked. A lot has changed over the last year and I believe that, since I haven't made any effort to cause trouble since, it warrants a restoration of my posting privileges. ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 01:46, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I am willing to believe that, after more than a year, you may have changed. However, merely stating that "a lot has changed" without specifying what has changed is not enough. I strongly suggest that you respond to the question below if you wish to make another unblock request. JamesBWatson ( talk) 10:41, 26 September 2011 (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.
1) I was blocked for what was said to be a continued "battle" mentality (which I though was a little extreme although I have had disputes with other users in the past). However, the block did not come until a user fabricated things about me and I was not willing to participate in the AN/I he filed against me because of that. The user used terminology in that post that I had been warned not to use (such as the term "troll") and held a condescending air about the whole thing claiming he would not be civil toward me in any way. He also said that I threatened another user (which I did not do) and refused to consider his position on something (which I had, but couldn't agree with because his position wasn't making any sense). Would the block have been inevitable regardless? I don't know. I just felt that THAT particular thing being the linchpin was totally unfair. You can look up on the top for the entire exchange- I kept it there for a reason.
2) Simple: don't engage in the same crap I did before.
3) What's basically the same editing I believed I was always engaging in: adding relevant information to the wiki, improving articles by adding said information, and overall contributing positively to the wiki.
Truthfully I was not expecting to have to answer any questions because I figured I'd served my time and that my reinstatement should've been automatic. However, I understand the reasons why I was asked and hope that my answers will grant me reinstatement. Like I said, a lot has changed and I want to get back into contributing to the wiki- which is really all I was here for to begin with. I wasn't here to cause trouble...trouble just seemed to find me and I reacted in not so good ways. -- ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 03:25, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
ChrisP2K5 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Addressed questions asked by MasterofPuppets, as per request of JamesBWatson. Also reiterating that much has changed, I have served my block for over a year, and believe that I am worthy of being reinstated. -- ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 03:25, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Accept reason:
Consider me a believer. Be free, and tread lightly! m.o.p 05:20, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article
The $128,000 Question, please cite a
reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of
verifiability. See
Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the
welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
WikiLubber (
talk)
21:03, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:40, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Please take a some time to review the guidelines for use of hyphens vs. dashes listed in MOS:DASH. Your last edits to Michael Larsen included several hyphens instead of dashes. Sottolacqua ( talk) 12:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Also, you've been asked to provide sources with your edits, but your changes to Press Your Luck in this edit contains no sourced information for your additions. Please provide the required backup to your edits. Sottolacqua ( talk) 14:25, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at
Press Your Luck, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice. Last warning. Please do not remove maintenance templates requesting citations or replace proper dashes with hyphens as you did in
this edit Sottolacqua (
talk)
23:37, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Happy Harry's, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Drugstore ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:12, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fort McMurray Team is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fort McMurray Team until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Zzaffuto118 ( talk) 05:02, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Big Gold Belt, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages No Way Out, Money in the Bank and Backlash ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:03, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Timothy J. Mara requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Zzarch ( talk) 09:05, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:38, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:57, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Super Bowl XLVI, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Victor Cruz ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:33, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited 1986 World Series, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kevin Mitchell and Marty Barrett ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:29, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Wayne-Route 23 (NJT station), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Willowbrook Mall ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:49, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at
Quiz Kids Challenge. Your edits appear to be unconstructive and have been
reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. Thank you.
WikiLubber (
talk)
22:57, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited SuperBrawl, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Junkyard Dog ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:16, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited WABC-TV, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Scrubs and Peter Marshall ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:28, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I'm having difficulty understanding your edit with regard to WXYZ-TV in the Action News table of stations that have used the name or format:
Used since 1972, but is more Action News in name only since most of WKYZ's broadcasts use Eyewitness News-style branding that ABC O&O's use (since it once was one), such as the circle 7 logo and "Cool Hand Luke"-based themes
Could you please explain what you mean by "more Action News in name only" and define "Eyewitness News-style branding"? This is unclear and puts too much information in one box of a table. If there's a difference between using the Action News name and the Action News format, this should be explained in more detail somewhere else. Thanks. JTRH ( talk) 10:52, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited King of the Ring (2010), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Hennigan ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:40, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Money in the Bank ladder match, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Big Show ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:29, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at
Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego? (game show). Your edits appear to be unconstructive and have been
reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. Thank you.
DawgDeputy (
talk)
12:59, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Please stop adding
unsourced content, as you did to
Squidward Tentacles. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on
verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be
blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Otterathome (
talk)
11:59, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ShopRite ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 13:39, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
You suggested that this article needs to be split. When I tried to split the article, I found there was in practice very little apparant material on Cinemassacre or James Rolfe to make the split. Would you consider making the split? Op47 ( talk) 22:00, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
If you'd like, sure I will.-- ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 01:34, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited 1991 Budweiser at The Glen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page STP ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 03:37, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:07, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
One of the pages you have created, Prime Time Begins at 7:30, is in the process of being deleted. You are invited to join a debate on whether this article can remain here. Thank you. Freshh ( talk) 19:46, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kevin Kugler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Thompson ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:51, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:33, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lash Huffman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vader ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:50, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hakeem Olajuwon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spalding ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:53, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited SportsNation (TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page KSPN ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:22, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Windham Rotunda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Nexus ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:03, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
The article Tide Ride has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
The Bushranger
One ping only
05:11, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Acme Fresh Market, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albertsons ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:43, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:28, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Williams F1, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Italian ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:17, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you
vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at
Arsenal F.C., you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
Walter Görlitz (
talk)
14:06, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
I'd sure like to know how posting an event from the Elementary episode titled "A Landmark Story" to the Arsenal F.C. qualifies as vandalism. I appreciate your concerns but do not tolerate being falsely accused of vandalizing pages. What I did was not vandalism. Could it be classified perhaps as unsourced/trivial info, perhaps. But to out and out accuse me of vandalizing a page is something I might be tempted to report to the AN/I board if it happens again. -- ChrisP2K5 ( talk) 06:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Buster Douglas vs. Evander Holyfield, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cruiserweight ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 13:53, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Who Wants to Be a Millionaire (U.S. game show), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Orange ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:45, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Richard Green (referee), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Greg Page ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:22, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Please do not add
original research or
novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to
The Price Is Right (U.S. game show). Please cite a
reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. You did not include a source for the second half in your edit "In 1973 CBS moved TPIR to 3pm, pairing it with
Match Game as part of what became the highest rated pairing in daytime."
AldezD (
talk)
15:01, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Beef 'O' Brady's Bowl may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 07:12, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Who Wants to Be a Millionaire (U.S. game show) may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 07:39, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
The task of creating a page for Timothy J. Mara had been on my to-do list for about two years. Because I work during the day and attend school at night, it's been on the back burner. I saw today that you had written one -- very nicely done. And thanks again -- he needed a page. He's kind of a forgotten owner to people born after 1985 or so. Kjscotte34 ( talk) 14:58, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Grand Union (supermarket), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages CVS, ShopRite and Hannaford ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:02, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sex Wars (game show), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:55, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Survivor Series (1994), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tatanka ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:01, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Lingo (U.S. game show). Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. -- Musdan77 ( talk) 17:43, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Lehigh Valley Phantoms may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 07:18, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Musdan77 ( talk) 01:20, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Season 5 did not begin with Big Month of Cash. That didn't start until October. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 08:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New York Mets, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WINS ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:53, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Please stop adding
unsourced content, as you did to
The Joker's Wild. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on
verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be
blocked from editing Wikipedia.
[1]
AldezD (
talk)
02:39, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
You may be
blocked from editing without further warning the next time you
vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at
The Joker's Wild.
[2]
AldezD (
talk)
01:01, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
AldezD (
talk)
06:31, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello. I see that you made an undiscussed move (and some other significant edits) of the Bernie Robbins Stadium article. You may not have noticed that the naming of this article had already been discussed extensively, as recorded on the Talk page at Talk:Bernie Robbins Stadium. The decision resulting from those prior discussions has been to keep the article at Bernie Robbins Stadium. Your edits did not seem to add any significant new information to the article – e.g., no new sources indicating that the situation has substantially changed. I have therefore reverted your changes. Please do not repeat this action without submitting a formal move request to determine whether there is a consensus to make those changes. You can find the instructions for how to submit a move request at WP:RM. It would also be helpful if you could find some new reliable sources to cite in the article, if the situation has changed. — BarrelProof ( talk) 16:33, 9 June 2014 (UTC)