User talk:Emily Goldstein: Difference between revisions
unblock request declined |
No edit summary |
||
Line 113: | Line 113: | ||
{{unblock reviewed|reason=Sagecandor gave me two different warnings for my first edit. I wanted to add [[Template:POV]] to the article.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fake_news_website&diff=752297612&oldid=752297371] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fake_news_website&diff=752297798&oldid=752297612] [[User:Emily Goldstein|Emily Goldstein]] ([[User talk:Emily Goldstein#top|talk]]) 23:47, 1 December 2016 (UTC)|decline=That explains what you intended to do. It does not explain why you broke every single external link in the process. Unless you can explain what happened there and how you will prevent that from happening again, you will not be unblocked. [[User:Huon|Huon]] ([[User talk:Huon|talk]]) 00:41, 2 December 2016 (UTC)}} |
{{unblock reviewed|reason=Sagecandor gave me two different warnings for my first edit. I wanted to add [[Template:POV]] to the article.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fake_news_website&diff=752297612&oldid=752297371] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fake_news_website&diff=752297798&oldid=752297612] [[User:Emily Goldstein|Emily Goldstein]] ([[User talk:Emily Goldstein#top|talk]]) 23:47, 1 December 2016 (UTC)|decline=That explains what you intended to do. It does not explain why you broke every single external link in the process. Unless you can explain what happened there and how you will prevent that from happening again, you will not be unblocked. [[User:Huon|Huon]] ([[User talk:Huon|talk]]) 00:41, 2 December 2016 (UTC)}} |
||
:{{u|Huon}} I don't know how that happened. Even if you don't believe me I shouldn't be permanently blocked just for that one edit. {{u|Sagecandor}} warned twice for the same edit if you check above. {{u|Ritchie333}} does that make a difference? [[User:Emily Goldstein|Emily Goldstein]] ([[User talk:Emily Goldstein#top|talk]]) 00:35, 3 December 2016 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:35, 3 December 2016
Welcome
|
Nomination of Donald Trump's hair for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Donald Trump's hair 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/Donald Trump's hair 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. pbp 19:02, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Donald Trump's hair was speedied
@Emily Goldstein: see also Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Speedy deletion while AfD still open :( + Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2016 October 25 --SI 19:53, 25 October 2016 (UTC) Hi Emily, could you help with the wording etc here? thx. --SI 18:51, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
November 2016
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Kanye West are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 23:19, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
- I apologize for my reverts on the 2020 election talk page. While I don't see how it is any useful or helpful for discussion, I am leaving it there; however, it does not belong on the Kanye West talk page. It has no relevance. And could you please respond to users on talk pages when reverted? Going back and forth isn't helping anyone and so is telling a user "Wrong" in every edit summary. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 23:23, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:Kanye West for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article; not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 23:24, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
- Could you please respond to my messages? I am getting tired of repeating the same things. Posting a video has no relevance on a talk page nor does it belong there and gives the impression of a forum. If you want it to be added, perhaps add a question to your message, such as "Do you think this should be mentioned in the article?" not by posting a video which isn't helpful and irrelevant. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 23:31, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
- "He goes around saying 'Trump is my all-time hero,'" the Republican candidate said of West. "He says it to everybody. So, Kanye West, I love him."
- Trump added that he might rescind his admiration for West if the 21-time Grammy winner follows through on his presidential ambitions.
- "Now, maybe in a few years I will have to run against him, I don't know. So I'll take that back," he said.[1]
- He has been in the news recently for talking about the election during his concert and other things. Kanye and Trump may both run for president in 2020. So it is relevant to the Kanye West and 2020 election articles. Emily Goldstein (talk) 23:47, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Sagecandor. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Fake news website without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. LINK at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fake_news_website&diff=752297612&oldid=752297371 Sagecandor (talk) 14:29, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- Not sure why you chose to break many of the links in sources in this article by removing the domain names from many citations. Sagecandor (talk) 14:38, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Fake news website, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not engage in sneaky subtle vandalism by removing domain names and breaking links to many websites in citations, as you did HERE with this edit. Sagecandor (talk) 14:48, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:54, 30 November 2016 (UTC)I realise going straight to indefinite sounds like cracking a sledgehammer with a nut, but I need an explanation of exactly what was going on with Fake news website before I can unblock. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:55, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- Quite a pointy edit, indeed. I hope that you have not crushed Emily with your sledgehammer, though: she makes a good point by being pointy, even if it's against the rules and can only be reverted by pushing a button or two. SashiRolls (talk) 17:20, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- A regex similar to the one run on that page should/could be a pop-up option on every Wikipedia page (One might argue that looking at the bibliography would give a similar, though less complete, vision... SashiRolls (talk) 17:29, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Emily Goldstein (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Sagecandor gave me two different warnings for my first edit. I wanted to add Template:POV to the article.[2] [3] Emily Goldstein (talk) 23:47, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Decline reason:
That explains what you intended to do. It does not explain why you broke every single external link in the process. Unless you can explain what happened there and how you will prevent that from happening again, you will not be unblocked. Huon (talk) 00:41, 2 December 2016 (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.
- Huon I don't know how that happened. Even if you don't believe me I shouldn't be permanently blocked just for that one edit. Sagecandor warned twice for the same edit if you check above. Ritchie333 does that make a difference? Emily Goldstein (talk) 00:35, 3 December 2016 (UTC)