User talk:Bleucheeses

Hello, Bleucheeses, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Manual of Style
Your first article
Also feel free to make test edits in the sandbox.

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 need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message or place "{{helpme}}" on this page and someone will drop by to help. You can also contact me if you wish by clicking "talk" to the right of my name.

Disambiguation link notification for March 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Seymour Bernstein, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Newark. 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) 09:14, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Bleucheeses. 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]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Bleucheeses. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ashe (entertainer)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Ashe (entertainer) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Death pool (talk) 14:35, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Maddie Poppe

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Maddie Poppe requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. WWGB (talk) 06:12, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help in laying the ground for this article with all the details and the references. It was a great help and saved me a lot of time preparing the page in a hurry after Maddie Poppe's win. I know the biggest views for the page would be immediately after her win and we needed to tell feature her career and musical life in a hurry. So thanks again. werldwayd (talk) 04:51, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, Werldwayd, that's the whole point of being on Wikipedia. Glad it all worked out and Idol is back on tv too!Bleucheeses (talk) 06:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

America's Got Talent (season 13)

Please stop the back-and-forth on America's Got Talent (season 13). I have opened a thread on the talk page at Talk:America's Got Talent (season 13)#"Golden buzzer" back and forth for you to discuss your proposed changes. This conversation should run its course before you try to put back your proposed changes. - SchroCat (talk) 10:01, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hi. Cound you please revert this edit(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Michael_Jackson&diff=843287254&oldid=843287117). The Last Days of Michael Jackson is not an official documentary. It is unofficial. Awardmaniac (talk) 11:11, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, could you bring up a topic on the talk page? I mean you can express your view. ABC is a Disney company, not sure how it could be called unofficial... I know there is some controversy but that could be merely because the Jacksons aren't making money from it. Bleucheeses (talk) 11:43, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re your edit at Mathematics

Hi Bleucheeses. Concerning your edit at Mathematics, please see WP:BRD, which says: "Making bold edits is encouraged, as it will result in either improving an article, or stimulating discussion. If your edit gets reverted, do not revert again. Instead, begin a discussion with the person who reverted your change to establish consensus." I won't revert your edit there again, but it would be good if you self-reverted and opened a discussion on the talk page proposing your change there. Regards, Paul August ☎ 19:41, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since I see that you have now added the "seek" back, I'm satisfied with your edits there. Paul August ☎ 19:44, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Had already done it! Bleucheeses (talk) 19:46, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BLP tag

Please read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons

especially the beginning of sections 5 and 6; my understanding is that all biographies of living persons should have the tag because of the possibility of legal problems, etc.; the tag explains itself as well: "This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page." This is a Wikipedia policy; by adding this tag to talk pages, it alerts readers they must be careful. Also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography for information on the scope of the project and why the tags are added to articles about people. thank you. --FeanorStar7 01:44, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. My understanding of the Wikipedia policy is that, as I explained above, the tags are there to protect the subjects of the articles from issues relating to privacy, legal issues, etc. I don't see any mention in either of the links I cited to how many visitors go to each page or amount of traffic to each page.--FeanorStar7 02:07, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Not to drag this out! The point is in society and pretty much anywhere things are not the same. You can't generalize... Of course you aren't going to know how many visitors go to a page but it is obvious that a 2nd year player on a professional soccer team is not as known as someone like Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson. Accordingly they are not treated the same. Bleucheeses (talk) 02:14, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree regarding what you are saying, but that isn't the purpose of the project, as I understand it. The fact that *any* biography of a living person (no matter how famous or unknown) is at risk of these issues is why the policy is in place (again as I understand it)--FeanorStar7 02:22, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Template:America's Got Talent

I'm not trying to start another argument so I'm coming here in good faith. I'm all for you creating America's Got Talent competitor articles however they should not be added into the template until the article has been created per WP:EXISTING: "Unlinked text should be avoided [in navboxes]". Also if you would like help creating the articles I'd be happy to assist if and where I can. TheDoctorWho (talk) 22:38, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done, creating them now, solved. Bleucheeses (talk) 22:40, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing. 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|Your reason here}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

It seems that you simply cannot work collaboratively with others. Even during the last of your two blocks, you didn't seem to understand and insisted on it being everyone else's fault. It appears that you are not capable of editing here without multiple conflicts with multiple editors. Until you can convince us otherwise, you must remain blocked per WP:NOTHERE. I am sorry it has to be this way. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:59, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This 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).

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

Request reason:

Ok, I am appealing to any admin other than AF. I "trusted" her to help and she never even discussed anything with other users. I have never said I haven't made mistakes. I have pointed out that there are problems on this site and have tried to address those. People are far too busy to pay attention. Most administrators are too busy to do much - unless you use noticeboards, which I haven't. It's super difficult to find any users willing to discuss much, talk pages for articles are largely ignored and then often a ruckus is stirred up when BOLD is mentioned. Yeah. Bleucheeses (talk) 08:08, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This does not address the reason for your block - if anything, it serves to further convince me that the block is justified. Please read WP:GAB before posting any further unblock requests. Yunshui ^雲 _水 08:13, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Also with the first block that was due to foul or awful language embedded in certain articles (Wikipedia uses curse words in some articles-not very often) here and misunderstanding that some articles apparently have it on here. Thus this is unjust as well. I am willing to try to find consensus. Bleucheeses (talk) 08:12, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This 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).

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

Request reason:

See reason

Decline reason:

You are blocked because you have demonstrated you can't work well with other admins. Your unblock requests here kind of double-down on this. That is, you've shown this to be true, that if we unblocked you, you'd continue to fail to work with others. As such, I'm leaving the block in place. I suggest you take a few months off and then try editing on a different project, taking great care to work carefully with others rather than pushing to have your own way. Yamla (talk) 11:01, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

I can try to be brief. This is drastic; I explained the first block. Obviously this site has its challenges and people have to figure out how to adapt. I would appreciate talking to an admin. Bleucheeses (talk) 10:17, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:CIR. Wikipedia generally does not provide mentorship. You have to teach yourself our rules and find your way up the learning curve on your own. You've proven yourself incapable of this, and Wikipedia does not have to tolerate your disruptions while you learn how to function here. Chris Troutman (talk) 12:16, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yamla is an admin. So is Yunshui. TonyBallioni (talk) 13:48, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Gabby Barrett

Hello, Bleucheeses,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Gabby Barrett should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gabby Barrett .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks,

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:17, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:America's Got Talent (season 13)

Hello, Bleucheeses. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:America's Got Talent (season 13), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Bot0612 (talk) 16:02, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Angelina Green for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Angelina Green 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/Angelina Green (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 22:31, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]