User talk:75.176.3.213

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 2012[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

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. Ridernyc (talk) 10:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Kaitlyn (wrestler)[edit]

Your edits violate several Wikipedia policies and have been reverted. Do not add week by week events. Wikipedia is not a news site but an online encyclopedia. Please see the articles "Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not" and "Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles" for more information. Kaitlyn doesn't have an official webpage, adding it violates Wikipedia:Spam. Per Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling, moves should only be listed when a reliable source is present, random fan recaps on the internet don't qualify. You also removed accurate information. Please refrain from editing until you're read the relevant guides mentioned above. --TheTruthiness (talk) 04:26, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. --208.38.59.161 (talk) 16:19, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule at Kaitlyn (wrestler). During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 17:42, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Eve Torres[edit]

'sup? Just got your message. What I'd advise if you feel strongly about it is to bring the topic up before WT:PW, relay their relevance and get some conversation going over what warrants inclusion to determine consensus. It's not a super contentious suggestion, but that page and Kaitlyn (wrestler) have been hot beds for WP:WAR of late and it's a good way to address concerns and avoid trouble. Take care. Papacha (talk) 15:29, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:American Perfection[edit]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Talk:American Perfection, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. 14:40, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Hairhorn (talk) 19:35, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop deleting that stuff, it is just a nomination for deletion and you are gonna get me blocked, AGAIN!!! Hemmeband17 (talk)

This is an odd protest, considering you already deleted this template using your account. Hairhorn (talk) 19:42, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Because I thought I got better links and resources, but I guess I didn't. I'm still trying to get better links and resources, I just needed the time.Hemmeband17 (talk)

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:27, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kaitlyn[edit]

I thought I deleted all Ringside Xcess sources. Read WP:PW/MOS], WrestleView is reliable, Ringside Xcess is not. I'm removing "signature moves" with only one source, even if it is a WrestleView one, since signature moves need at least two different sources.Ribbon Salminen (talk) 10:17, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then just revert the thing you changed, not the whole fucking page.Ribbon Salminen (talk) 10:35, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, Ringside Xcess is not reliable, because the style guide doesn't say it is. Doesn't matter what your buddy, neighbor, mom or dad says.Ribbon Salminen (talk) 10:50, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I just have this thing, where stupid people piss me off. I've told you several times to look for reliable sources and read the style guide and then you revert the whole page and add the same unreliable sources back on the page. And when I revert that, then you start bitching and moaning about me not reading the whole goddam thing you just reverted. Yeah, that gets a bit tiresome. And how exactly is Dolph Ziggler's "In wrestling" section different from the one I'm using for Kaitlyn? I'm going by the style guide, there's no interpreting, I'm going by the rules agreed upon by the community, Ringside Xcess is not reliable. Period.Ribbon Salminen (talk) 11:45, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Have you read the style guide I've given you twice already? Wretlezone, Wrestlininc, E-Wrestling News, Wrestling News World, Lords of Pain and fansites are not reliable sources. Just out of curiosity, where in http://www.wrestleview.com/viewnews.php?id=1319832919 does it state that Kaitlyn used a dropkick? Do you think I'm stupid? I went through every one of those sources you added and almost none of them include the moves they claim to include. There were probably two right, but not for the same move. Two different sources are needed to establish that the move is indeed a signature move as it is a list of "signature moves" not "moves that she can do". I just hope something happens to that sockpuppet investigation that you're under...Ribbon Salminen (talk) 15:27, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
One mistake?! I spent fifteen minutes going through that shit and it was all like that, made-up. It has always been about RELIABLE sources. IF she uses the moves in every one of her matches, it shouldn't be so difficult to source them.Ribbon Salminen (talk) 15:41, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Once more WRESTLEVIEW IS RELIABLE PER THE STYLE GUIDE. I'm leaving moves with two reliable sources as they have been proven to be SIGNATURE moves, not just MOVES SHE HAS DONE ONCE. Every source I listed is unreliable. SEE THE STYLE GUIDE! And please, you're the last person who should tell me what will get me banned from here, buddy.Ribbon Salminen (talk) 15:55, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, duh. If it's not listed in the "websites proven reliable" section then it is not to be used. Read the bottom of the page "If the source you have in mind is not listed under the reliable sources section, it should not be used to source controversial statements." Jeez, how hard is this?Ribbon Salminen (talk) 16:36, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessarily from two different sites, you can, for example, have two WrestleView sources for a signature move. It just needs to be demonstrated that the wrestler has used the move more than once, because that makes it a signature move and signature moves are what we're listing on these pages.Ribbon Salminen (talk) 16:58, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Trust me, I will absolutely not delete them, if they are properly sourced, which they weren't earlier.Ribbon Salminen (talk) 17:05, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You'll need a source that specifically names the song as "Spin the Bottle".Ribbon Salminen (talk) 14:46, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Ashley Java official site is fine. Use that.Ribbon Salminen (talk) 16:54, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's really tough. Flickr is usually the best place to find pics, but all usable pics on the site are already on Kaitlyn's Wiki page. Don't upload any other Flickr pics, 'cause those will get you banned. Basically, you'll just have to get lucky and have someone post a picture they have taken themselves and own the license to.Ribbon Salminen (talk) 18:17, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ashley Jana concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ashley Jana, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 16:41, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ashley Jana[edit]

Hello 75.176.3.213. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Ashley Jana".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ashley Jana}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 14:01, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:75.176.3.213&oldid=1159615088"