User talk:BFlatley

Welcome!

Hello, BFlatley, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Bailey Stocker, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. 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:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Everymorning talk 20:36, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Bailey Stocker

The article Bailey Stocker has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Everymorning talk 20:36, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Bailey Stocker

The article Bailey Stocker has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. ubiquity (talk) 20:42, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015

Hello, I'm Ubiquity. I noticed that you removed a Biographies of Living Persons PROD, from Bailey Stocker, and I wanted to let you know that I have replaced it. Please don't remove these Biographies of Living Persons PRODs from articles unless they contain at least one reliable source or were created before 18 March 2010. If you oppose the deletion of an article under this process, please consider adding reliable sources to the article or commenting at the respective talk page. Thank you. ubiquity (talk) 20:43, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Lyon Smith

Hello BFlatley,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Lyon Smith for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. _Musa^{^Talk} 21:04, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 2015

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from one or more pages into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:12, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot just change an article's title by deleting the content of one page and copying it to another. Please see WP:RM for the proper process. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:14, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved, as you did to Yakuza, 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. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 23:29, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Joker in other media, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Golden Globe Award for Best Supporting Actor. 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) 11:46, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 2015

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at List of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2012 TV series) characters. 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. Diffs: [1] Looks to me like you've logged in to continue the disruptive resubmission of fancruft to the article that you have previously submitted multiple times from IPs. You need to seek consensus for the inclusion of this content and achieve that consensus before restoring. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:06, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bflatley, please--this is an encyclopedia. It is not supposed to be a collection of trivia about (and I can't believe I'm actually writing this) a bunch of turtles who eat pizza and practice martial arts. It is not. Drmies (talk) 21:13, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 2015

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in The Dark Knight (film), disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Betty Logan (talk) 23:59, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at The Dark Knight (film) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Your repeated edits to the plot section constitute long-term edit-warring. Several editors have expressed concern regarding your revisions at Talk:The_Dark_Knight_(film)#Plot, so please do not restore your version of the plot again with obtaining a consensus. Betty Logan (talk) 00:23, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I want to point out, BFlatley, that you have already drawn my attention for disruptive edits. If you continue to be disruptive, in any interpretation of the term, whether it is to submit unsourced content, submit a plot summary that is in excess of 700 words, or otherwise contradict any other Wikipedia guideline, I will have no choice but to interrupt your editing privileges. It's an easily avoidable situation, particularly here. Stop asserting your bloated plot summary at The Dark Knight (film). Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:36, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Dark Knight (film), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages MNC, James Gordon and Chin Han. 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) 10:58, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistent disruptive editing. 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 first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:31, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily for disruptive editing, specifically for repeated editing against consensus at The Dark Knight (film). Per WP:FILMPLOT, plot summaries should be 400-700 words. In these edits you indulgently bloat the plot from 705 words to 1149. This is absurd, particularly when other editors have explained this to you before, (myself included,) and have vocalized on the article's talk page that your excessive detail is inappropriate. Wikipedia is a community project, and community preference prevails over your personal whims. After your block expires, I urge you to start editing per normal editing guidelines. See MOS:FILM and MOS:TV if these are areas you intend to edit in. I also urge you to participate in discussions so that other editors can understand where you might be coming from. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyphoidbomb (talk • contribs)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring, as you did at The Dark Knight (film). 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 first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:31, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 19 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the The Dark Knight Rises page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:43, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 weeks for persistent disruptive editing. 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 first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:14, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Dark Knight

Upon resumption of your edit-warring at The Dark Knight (film) is crystal clear you are incapable of following the rules. I have repoted the latest incident at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:BFlatley reported by User:Betty Logan (Result: ) should you wish to comment. Betty Logan (talk) 09:08, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

November 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 months for edit warring. 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 first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:58, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Dark Knight Rises, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Militant. 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) 09:04, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:58, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bane (The Dark Knight Rises)

I wish to add a page like this if there's already a The Joker (The Dark Knight) page. Can you at least give me permission to add that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BFlatley (talk • contribs)

You are not welcome to edit at Wikipedia so long as you are blocked indefinitely. You may request that your account be unblocked by following the directions in the block template above. However, you're going to need to demonstrate some comprehension of why you were blocked, and you'd have to convince an admin of how things will be different if you are unblocked. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:46, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You should follow the WP:STANDARDOFFER. Betty Logan (talk) 05:07, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, BFlatley. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

BFlatley (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #25411 was submitted on Jun 04, 2019 13:20:43. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 13:20, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]