User talk:BoxOfChickens

International Dwarf Fashion Show

Shortly after I published a article on the International Dwarf Fashion Show you wrote about conflict of interest on my talk page, you also provided links to wikipedia guidelines. I am currently reviewing the pages relating to conflict of interest but they are extensive. Could you please be more specific on the conflict of interest that exists within the article. I tried removing the website from the infobox and toning down the text that was only was supported by the organization web site, the mission statement. Some of the work I did to tone tone the article down, such as removal of the web site from the info box was undone by anonymous user. Thank you

Weareallable (talk) 03:38, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

it appears that you may have a connection to the International Dwarf Fashion Show based on the link in your user page. BoxOfChickens (talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 17:40, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

You really do need to justify that, BoxOfChickens. A great many editors link to articles they create.

You seem to be in a great hurry to learn, and mistakes do happen, but you seem to be making more recently than is viewed as appropriate. Fiddle Faddle 22:38, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

RE: The Hum, a link to www.thehum.info

Hello BoxOfChickens,

I posted a Help me request and received a reply (please see below).

Please could someone explain why I have received a warning (below) for adding a link to www.thehum.info to the external links section of the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hum. Please explain specifically in what way this link/site is: Soapboxing(?) Promotional(?) Advertising(?)

The warning I received from BoxOfChickens: Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at The Hum, you may be blocked from editing. BoxOfChickens (talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 20:57, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

My reason for adding the link: Though the article isn't very good, and very unrepresentative of the "phenomenon" (speaking from direct experience of "the hum")... At best, in my humble opinion, this article could be described as representing the thoughts and viewpoints of people who have not ever experienced this "phenomenon" - only. I would like to add the link to this site for balance and as a representation of real people's real experiences.

Regards Hum sufferer (talk) 13:24, 31 December 2015 (UTC)Regards, Ian

Hi, I believe that the reason that BoxOfChickens gave you that warning is because you had added the link on multiple occasions even after having your edits reverted. If you want to know why that editor did that, please ask them here. I think that without any form of message to tell you why it was reverted, you may not have known that some may see it as soapboxing, but now, hopefully you know, see WP:SOAP for more information about soapboxing on Wikipedia. If you really want to add that external link though, first propose it at the talk page, to try and build consensus about it. I do think that you should ask BoxOfChickens about why they gave you that warning though, for their reasoning. Thanks. Seagull123 Φ 19:40, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Please could you respond to Seagull123's suggestion that I ask for your reasoning for giving me a warning?

Regards Hum sufferer (talk) 19:49, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

I removed the link because it appeared to be promotional material. When an account with a username related to a subject and no edits except ones on that subject repeatedly adds an external link to an article on that subject, it appears to be advertising. BoxOfChickens (talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 17:39, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm not adding unsourced information

I'm not sure why you added the unsourced template to my talk page. I was reverting the unsourced edits on Ulrich Walter, as you did your self. Boomer Vial (talk) 18:05, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

In Response

Hello. Okay. Thanks for the help, I guess. :-) DerpMeep (talk) 03:29, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

No problem. I just like welcoming new users with cookies (if they are not vandalizing). BoxOfChickens (talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 03:34, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

That's nice! You are a good person. Thanks for the welcome and the cookies, they looked good. Shame I can't eat any considering they are just pixels.. lol. DerpMeep (talk) 03:38, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

CRIM3S Please understand. You are entering INCORRECT INFORMATION. The source article is INCORRECT and I have written to them to check their facts. Ethan Kath had nothing to do with the band CRIM3S in any way. This is FALSE and extremely degrading and damaging to the band. Also, you keep adjusting the names to incorrect names! I will contact the band and get passport screenshots for proof, please tell me how I can upload them here as evidence of the correct names.

January 2016

Please refrain from abusing warning or blocking templates, as you did to User_talk:8-f4t-r4t-8. Doing so is a violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. There was absolutely no need for you to add eight final warnings to that IPs talk page. That was grossly excessive. Reporting this situation to the WP:AN3 board would be a way better route to deal with this. Boomer Vial (talk) 20:07, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

They are not an IP, to start with, and the warnings were necessary as they continued their behavior. The situation was reported to WP:AN3 after 6 final warnings and has not received an admin response. BoxOfChickens (talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 20:10, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but it was *way* over the line to add that many, and and any administrator would say the same. Secondly, you submitted your report against 8-f4t-r4t-8 3 minutes after you added the seventh final warning to his page. Not only that but you went down in level in using the template, just so you could abuse it some more. Honestly, you should just take a WP:WALK. You're only digging your grave deeper. Also, my mistake for mistaking the user as an IP user. Boomer Vial (talk) 20:19, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Timtrent

My bad! I've read that header so many times, that was a knee-jerk reaction. Thanks for catching it! -- samtar ^whisper 22:24, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

In Response

Hi. I know it isn't a social network. Why would you think I did; plus.. are you watching me? DerpMeepFile:Green Pi.PNG 03:29, 6 January 2016 (UTC)§

It appears that you made a comment on the user page of User:Gaylord200 that seemed to be something you would say on a social networking site. I don't watch specific users unless they are involved in repeated vandalism or suspicious activity. I found your edit by patrolling edits by new users. BoxOfChickens (talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 03:38, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

OHH ok.. gotcha. Thanks for the revert and tip.