User talk:Boaxy

January 2016

Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Unfinished Business (2015 film), please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. Categories must also be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. Thank you.

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Unfinished Business (2015 film). Your edits have been or will be 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.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Unfinished Business (2015 film). Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
You were recently reprimanded for this kind of misconduct at the Sailor Moon articles. If you continue your disruptive editing and personal attacking, your topic ban may be extended to further restrict your editing privileges.

License tagging for Image:Sclub8sorry.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sclub8sorry.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

July 2010

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Gabourey Sidibe. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 14:06, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames that give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, I have blocked this account; please take a few moments to create a new account with a username that represents only you. If your username doesn't represent a group, organization or website, you may ask for a review of this username block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below this message. Thank you. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:09, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Hotel2

Template:Hotel2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:16, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Requested username:

Boaxy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Accept reason:

Allowing username change to requested username. Please put this request in at Wikipedia:Changing username as soon as possible to avoid re-blocking. Singularity42 (talk) 15:57, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Theft Auto V GAN

I would like to request that you withdraw the GAN for Grand Theft Auto V as soon as possible, per the discussion on the talk page. The article is nowhere near ready for a GAN - according to the criteria, it automatically fails section 5 as the game has only been recently released, meaning the article is not stable. In addition, with the current state of the Reception section, it fails section 3. I am currently working to collate a number of reviews together and overhaul the reception section. I also have to point out that you haven't made any contributions to the article at hand, and normally the GAN process is undertaken by editors who have worked at the article and then feel it's ready. CR4ZE (talk) 03:24, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Per step 1 of the nominations procedure, someone who is not a significant contributor should consult with the contributors before nominating. You did not, and you have not contributed to the article in any way. This is negligent behaviour and I have requested that the nomination be withdrawn as soon as possible. CR4ZE (t) 14:27, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

October 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Karen Dyer 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:

goes by the stage name '''Karen Dyer''', born on December 20, 1977 in [[Fort Lauderdale, Florida]]) is an American voice artist and film and television actress, perhaps known mainly for her part in

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:56, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Pomplamoose (album)

Hello, Boaxy. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Pomplamoose (album), for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

edit the page
remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. ColonelHenry (talk) 05:33, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pomplamoose (album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amazon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:06, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Categories must be supported by content in article

Hi, I noticed your category addition here at Christopher Dorner. WP:CAT states "Categorization of articles must be verifiable. It should be clear from verifiable information in the article why it was placed in each of its categories." I have removed the category for this reason, particularly since LGBT activism is not what Dorner was known for. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:57, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your change to the Cosmopolitan of Las Vegas

I have reverted your change to this article. You have specified that lounge music is the theme of the hotel/casino, which is highly questionable. You must cite a Wikipedia reliable source if you wish to include this. Perhaps you are referring to one of the venues within the Cosmopolitan, but the theme does not apply to the hotel/casino as a whole. --Larry (talk) 12:26, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rhythm & Blues in the House

Hi. Just wanted to stop by to regretfully inform you about reverting your house decision. According to this logic, it should also include Atkins' techno despite techno being more of an anti-R&B genre, though. I am all against for its inclusion into R&B footer because the general consensus is "House = electronica-based genre" but if you can show me somewhere, preferably of reliable information, that house is a direct descendant of the R&B tradition we can talk it out but now I can't help myself but to find it dubious (but not impossible since it is true house indeed—depending on your view—ripped-off R&B-associated genres). Sincerely, ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 20:53, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 2014

Now this isn't a very much insightful and informative rebuttal, is it? ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 00:53, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Throw That Boy Pussy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Throw That Boy Pussy 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/Throw That Boy Pussy 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. STATic message me! 20:18, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fly Young Red, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cash Money (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:50, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bruce Dow may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"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:

[[Category:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:59, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Just Good Friends (song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pop. 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) 09:16, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited It's Different for Girls, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New Wave. 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) 11:23, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate what you're doing

Personal Appreciation

I know your Total Drama character article is still in the alpha stage (and from what I've seen, I think it probably could do with some changes to keep it less "in-universe") but I really appreciate your effort in attempting to make one.

I always thought it was very strange for a show with so many characters and as long-running as Total Drama to not have a dedicated character page. As meticulous as the TD Wikia is, a lot of the articles are somewhat sloppily written and I believe that a proper Wikipedia character page with just general descriptions and important facts about characters would be a good thing. DarkRoseBlast (talk) 05:37, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited It's Different for Girls, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New Wave. 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) 08:58, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Knower (band), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bluescreen. 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) 09:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Clasics IV traces.jpeg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Clasics IV traces.jpeg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:04, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015

Hello, I'm AJona1992. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Big Brother 17 (U.S.) that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. jona ^(talk) 00:25, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Big Brother 17 (U.S.) 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. NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:33, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

July 2015

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you make a personal attack towards another editor, as you did at Talk:Sailor Moon, you will be blocked from editing.--Loyalmoonie (talk) 18:26, 9 July 2015 (UTC)Chris[reply]

Continued from talk page

Look, I'm sorry if I got a little hostile, but listen. It is noble that you cherish Sailor Moon for influencing you being an openly gay person. But keep in mind that not everybody who enjoys Sailor Moon is necessarily gay or lesbian (or trans or bi). And not every single moonie supports SSM and such. To insert those categories would ultimately give other people (who may not even support the LGBT movement) reading the article the assumption that every person who does enjoy Sailor Moon is a homosexual (and/or supports SSM), even though I understand 100% that not every Sailor Moon fan is that way. In a similar way, I always thought Sailor Moon was a positive influence for people, such as myself, who have Asperger Syndrome, because when I first saw the show, it helped me become more open about my AS, and feel accepted as a human being. But I decided not to include such content in the article, or insert such categories (if such Asperger-related categories exist for anime), because I believed that if I did put that in the article, people would think that Sailor Moon is for (what others may call) "retards," which even I know is not necessarily true. Do you see what I'm telling you here? I'm sorry if I got a little rough on you. If you believe that Sailor Moon is a positive LGBT influence, you are free to believe that; I cannot change your perspective. But please think about what I said here so that you can understand the differences of every Sailor Moon fan there may be.--Loyalmoonie (talk) 03:40, 10 July 2015 (UTC)Chris[reply]

Proposed deletion of Throw That Boy Pussy

The article Throw That Boy Pussy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NSONGS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Azealia911 _talk 22:26, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Boaxy behavior at Sailor Moon. Thank you. —Farix (t | c) 12:32, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Topic Ban

Per this ANI thread, I have closed the matter with the decision to implement a topic ban indefinitely prohibiting you from editing any article on or about Sailor Moon. A record of the topic ban has been recorded here. This topic ban will remain in effect until such time as community consensus or an WP:ARBCOM ruling supersede it. TomStar81 (Talk) 07:31, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And, yes, a topic ban, as per WP:TBAN, covers all pages relating to the topic, including article talk pages. However, like with all indefinite topic bans, you may well be eligible for the WP:OFFER if you wait the six months indicated and don't cause any trouble of any sort during that period. Honestly, there are still an incredible number of poorly developed articles or nonexistent articles of all kinds, including cities, towns, historical leaders, historical events, and the list goes on and on and on. If nothing else, you might easily be able to keep yourself active for the six month topic ban by editing content about notable topics relating to other topics, such as, for instance, African-American history. Trust me, there is a lot that can still be done there. John Carter (talk) 17:50, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for violation of your topic ban via this post which came after your were both notified of the topic ban and its applicability to talk pages. Any further violations of the ban will be met with increasing block lengths. 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 ~~~~}}. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 15:12, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 2015

The recent edit you made to Frankie Grande constitutes vandalism and has been reverted. It also appears that you may be using an IP sockpuppet to continue to vandalize the page. Please do not continue to vandalize Wikipedia pages, or you may be blocked again. Thank you. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:59, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Loyalmoonie (talk) 17:08, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Chris[reply]

WARNING - Off-Wiki Personal Attack on Reddit

Your recent off-wiki personal attacks, as seen on Reddit^[1], makes it seem that you are unaware that Wikipedia is a serious project. LGBT categories are NOT used on movie/TV/anime articles on the sole basis that one (or more) characters in the specific work is LGBT. Regardless of whether there is a specific LGBT theme in the work, the intention of it's LGBT-oriented content audience must be backed by a VERIFIABLE source, such as an interview with the CREATORS, in which they explicitly state that the particular work is LGBT-oriented. Other than that, the Wikipedia categories (including LGBT categories) are NOT TOYS for pop culture, and Wikipedia is not a democracy, and is not a battleground to push your sexuality onto others, or make personal attacks against those who oppose your viewpoint, regardless of your sexuality. No matter how loud you cry homophobia or discrimination, if you cannot accept the fact that there must be a consensus on controversial issues, such as these silly edit wars you have played before, then you don't need to be editing. This is your final warning you will receive before you are once again reported to the administrators. You may not receive another second chance before you are blocked for an extended time, so you need to consider this as a wake-up call to stop being tendentious and accept the fact that you cannot always get what you want.--Loyalmoonie (talk) 05:50, 27 March 2016 (UTC)Chris[reply]

References

^ https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/comments/4bbelp/this_is_boaxy_im_pissed_and_mad_as_hell_rebuttal/

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

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. Thank you. Ilovetopaint (talk) 19:59, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring, as you did at [[:Pizzicato Five]]. 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. slakr^\ talk / 03:24, 14 May 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

I was blocked for supposedly edit warring. That is not true. I reverted edits that I made which pertain to the article. The user who kept reverting my edits, has no fucking idea who the subject of the article is. They are pissed off due to a prior relationship I had with them, and they are also homophobic as I am clearly a homosexual man stated by my talk page. Pizzicato five clearly has jazz, electronic dance and blues roots. I also gave good sources to prove that. Just listen to their fucking music. I'm done. Wikipedia is a joke. I edit many music articles, yet this one seems to be an issue. All these asian musicians use blues and jazz genres in their music. Boaxy (talk) 06:05, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Because you are homosexual, anyone who disagrees with you on anything must be homophobic? I have increased the length of your block to 1 week for that unacceptable personal attack. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:41, 14 May 2016 (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.

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making personal attacks towards other editors. 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 ~~~~}}. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:35, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You come back from a block which was extended for making personal attacks and immediately repeat the personal attack that got you blocked?! Such behavior is simply unacceptable. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:36, 22 May 2016 (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).

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

Request reason:

I'm actually Phrasia. Fuck all y'all. So you can add me to Phrasias sockpuppet list. Fuck wikipedia. <Personal attack redacted> LoyalMoonie and Boing said Zebedee. I'm going to be famous and have my own wikipedia page so fuck all y'all. Boaxy (talk) 09:39, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Talk page access revoked. As the blocking admin, technically I shouldn't decline this unblock, but I'm invoking the "any reasonable admin" clause to stop the disruption. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:58, 22 May 2016 (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.

Nomination of Pomplamoose (album) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pomplamoose (album) 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/Pomplamoose (album) 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. Rathfelder (talk) 11:21, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Boaxy. 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]

[1] ttps://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/comments/4bbelp/this_is_boaxy_im_pissed_and_mad_as_hell_rebuttal/

[1]