User talk:Sunderland against Di Canio

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Sunderland against Di Canio, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]

Teahouse logo

Hi Sunderland against Di Canio! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Theopolisme (I'm a Teahouse host)

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:15, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

1894–95 World Championship[edit]

Hi - I have started a discussion on this article at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football#1894–95 World Championship. Your contribution would be appreciated. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 13:18, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of 1894–95 World Championship for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1894–95 World Championship 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/1894–95 World Championship 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 09:42, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

MMA AfDs[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, I hope you enjoy your editing experience here. If you're going to comment at deletion discussions please be sure to check the notability guidelines for that field--many areas (e.g., authors, actors, athletes, etc.) have additional guidelines beyond the general ones given at WP:GNG. I mention this because your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yuri Ivlev and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artiom Damkovsky show you are unaware of this. The notability guidelines for MMA fighters can be found at WP:NMMA. If you look there, and at any number of previous MMA deletion discussions, you'll see that being a champion of a second tier MMA organization does not show notability. No worries--WP has a lot of policies (although the ones on notability WP:GNG, verifiability WP:V, and reliable sources WP:RS are probably the most important) and it takes time to get to know them. I've been editing on WP for a few years and still consider myself a beginner. Again, happy editing and feel free to ask questions of more experienced editors! Papaursa (talk) 20:16, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved, as you did to Bender, Moldova, without good reason. They need to have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Consensus was previously reached to locate the article about the city on the Bender, Moldova page. This is a controversial topic requiring consensus, so if you want to move the page start a new request for move. Paris1127 (talk) 16:51, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Diego Maradona[edit]

Your links don't work. (I didn't remove them by the way, it was an IP) Leaky Caldron 12:10, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ciprian Marica, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Winger (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) 11:11, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 22[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sunderland A.F.C., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bob Murray (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) 11:30, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

August 2013[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm JMHamo. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Willian Borges da Silva, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. JMHamo (talk) 21:01, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Club Loyalty Award[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Club Loyalty Award has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable sporting award

While all constructive 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. GiantSnowman 10:19, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Club Loyalty Award for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Club Loyalty Award 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/Club Loyalty Award 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. GiantSnowman 13:34, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Misleading edit summaries[edit]

Information icon Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page FC Dynamo Kyiv has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. The same applies to this edit to HC Donbass. I am puzzled as to how such totally inaccurate edit summaries could occur by accident: perhaps you can explain. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:02, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Ah! Now I understand the reason for the strange edit summaries mentioned in my message above. I see that both of those edits repeated reverted edits by a long-term disruptive edit-warring editor who has been evading blocks on various IP addresses. I also see that there is a history of that IP editor supporting your edits, as for example in at least three AfD discussions, in at least one of which that IP editor has placed more than one "vote" using different IP addresses. Either you are the same editor, evading your blocks again, or you are another person, editing to support that person, and effectively help him or her to evade the block and to continue his/her edit war, and in either case you were deliberately using misleading edit summaries to try to hide what you were doing. Naturally, this account has been blocked from editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:23, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Sunderland against Di Canio (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

Me and IP do know each other, he gave me his email after a deletion a discisson and we had been talking since, yet that doesnt really justify my block. It's not metapuppeting for a simple reason, I always edit things about sports, I edited one of those pages in the past, and when IP was blocked, he asked me to edit them. In both cases it was making a small improvement to the page, so it's not really metapuppeting. He didn't ask me to do anything to any pages where there are revert wars or whatever going on because that would obviously be unfair. The reason I used misleading edit summeries is because I just can't be arsed with Wiki-obsessed admins like you who will revert me again just because I "dared" to rever you. Sunderland against Di Canio (talk) 2:07 pm, Today (UTC+0)

Decline reason:

In other words: you were editing on behalf of a blocked user and deliberately disrupted Wikipedia's processes by using false edit summaries to try and retain those edits. That's not a very convincing reason to unblock you. Yunshui  14:20, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and 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.

Your block has been reset to its original length of two weeks, as you have chosen to evade the block by using a sockpuppet account. Further abuse of multiple accounts is likely to lead to a block for much longer, possibly indefinitely. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:58, 28 February 2014 (UTC)