User talk:Afmkzs

Welcome!

Hello, Afmkzs, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. As well, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or you can type {{helpme}} on your user page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 17:56, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

August 2013[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Famke Janssen. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. Lady Lotus (talk) 13:29, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consider this an only warning: it is clear that this is a new account but an old editor, restoring IP edits that were disruptive enough to cause the article to be protected. If you continue this account will be blocked, and the article protected again. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 14:14, 16 August 2013 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Afmkzs reported by User:Lady Lotus (Result: ). Thank you. Lady Lotus (talk) 16:01, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring and failure to heed warning, as you did at Famke Janssen. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 16:23, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 2013[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Famke Janssen. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. Awards were remove per WP:INDISCRIMINATE; do not continue to re-add them. Lady Lotus (talk) 12:21, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You've been blocked for these edits before, so you are well aware there is no consensus for them. If you continue to restore the disputed content without discussing your edits on the talk page and obtaining consensus for their inclusion, you will be blocked again.--Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 16:49, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Famke Janssen, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. You have already been told that the awards are removed per WP:INDISCRIMINATE, quit reverting them or you WILL be blocked. Lady Lotus (talk) 12:12, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Famke Janssen 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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

|}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:23, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Famke Janssen 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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

|}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:52, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 Months for abuse of editing privileges, as you did at Famke Janssen. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:16, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]