User talk:Potter45

Welcome!

Hello, Potter45, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Introduction - gives a brief outline of how to edit Wikipedia.
The five pillars of Wikipedia - five important things to know about the project.
Manual of Style - how to format an article correctly. Another good way is to check out our Featured and Good Articles.
Referencing for beginners - all information on Wikipedia should be verified by other sources, and referencing facts properly prevents original research creeping into articles.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Most of all, don't be nervous about editing, be bold!. Everybody was new here once, and there will always be somebody around if something isn't right. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

To help us identify you, please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~, which will automatically produce your name and the date. Again, welcome!

Bob talk 22:51, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

April 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Peter Cook 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:

{{info box | comedian

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:29, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm SQGibbon. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Arthur 2: On the Rocks, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. SQGibbon (talk) 20:11, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing things

Hi Bob, hope it's going well for you on Wikipedia. One thing I have noticed is you're adding details to articles which should really be referenced if they're to be included. We have a term for it on Wikipedia "Original Research" - i.e. personal observations, theories, etc. So, to take an example from your recent edits, has Mike Myers ever acknowledged in an interview (book, magazine, online article) that he is influenced by Pete and Dud, or is that just you noticing a similarity? There are some links to help you in the message at the top, but any questions, do ask. Bob talk 21:28, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bob3458, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Bob3458! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Ushau97 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:28, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1929, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thunderbirds (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) 08:49, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 2014

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Chris Rock. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. SQGibbon (talk) 21:04, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at David Cross. SQGibbon (talk) 16:55, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Graham Norton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arthur Mathews (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) 08:51, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries help understanding

Edit summaries are a big help, especially when changing or removing content. I reverted your edit here to All in the Family with the summary "unexplained removal of content". You made the same edit two days later [1], but when I took the time to take a closer look at the article, I saw that the information was already provided a little earlier on, and guessed that that was probably your reasoning. An edit summary (see WP:EDITSUMMARY) could have saved us both some time. All too often, misunderstandings lead to edit wars and harsh and regrettable words. So please consider adding edit summaries to your edits. Willondon (talk) 19:43, 10 October 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) 17:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

December 2015

Hello, I'm Dhtwiki. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Lone Ranger without 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; I have restored the removed content. 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. Thanks. Dhtwiki (talk) 19:57, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2016

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Paramount Pictures 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:

web |url=http://forums.goldenagecartoons.com/showthread.php?t=2907 |title=Forums.GoldenAgeCartoo]]ns.com |publisher=Forums.GoldenAgeCartoons.com |accessdate=January 7, 2010}}</ref> After an
paramount.com/inside-studio/studio/executives/meet-executives/brad-grey |work=Inside the Studio >At the Studio >Executives >Executives |publisher=Paramount Picture Corporation |accessdate=February 7, 2013}}</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:54, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

September 2016

Your recent editing history at One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (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 are 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. Majora (talk) 22:18, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Bob3458. 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]

Non-free image use

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to a page, specifically National Film Registry, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:45, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've uploaded multiple images to to the National Film Registry Wikipedia page and this has never come up.

Hi Bob3458. Technically, files are uploaded to the servers of Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons and then added to articles, and how the file is used depends upon its copyright status and licensing. Certain files are freely licensed or public domain, while others are non-free content. The first two types can be pretty much used anywhere on Wikipedia without too much restriction, but each use of non-free content must satisfy Wikipedia's non-free content use policy, which is quite restrictive.

You can find out how a particular image is licensed simply by clicking on the image itself and looking at it's respective Wikipedia page. So, if you click on File:DicksonFilm Still.png, you'll find that this file is licensed as being in the public domain; on the other hand, if you click on File:Rocky Horror throne screencap.jpg, you see that this image is a non-free film screenshot. A file's licensing cannot really be determined from simply looking at the file itself and all files upload to Wikipedia/Commons are required to have a license, so it's best to check a file's page first before adding it to any article.

As to why this has never come up before, I cannot really say. A problematic article can "exist" on Wikipedia for years before someone notices it and either fixes it or nominates it for deletion, and the same applies to files. The fact that nobody has complained before is not really considered a valid argument when it comes to file use, especially non-free use. Besides if you look at the article history for National Film Registry, you'll see that the images you added as well as some others were previously removed by Hullaballoo Wolfowitz as recently as yesterday (January 4, 2017) for the very same reason. Anyway, I've posted a little more detail about non-free image use in this article at Talk:National Film Registry#Non-free image use and you're welcome to comment there if you like, but the established consensus has pretty much been that this type of decorative usage of non-free content is almost never allowed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:43, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As to why this hadn't come up before -- there are a variety of automated processes that monitor non-free file use and flag possible violations. Several of these processes flag pages when the number of nonfree files passes a threshold (the number varies with the process). My guess is that this page didn't cross that threshold until very recently. There's also a large backlog of flagged pages to review. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 15:25, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2017

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at Meryl Streep, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. The US Medal of Freedom does not come with post-nominal priveleges. Binksternet (talk) 19:29, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Use of File:Tupac Amaru Shakur2.jpg

Greetings. I've reverted your restoration of this file to 1996 and 1971. Please understand that this image is a non-free file and must comply with our non-free content criteria policy. As such, every use of an image must have a valid fair use rationale for that use. Further, non-free images can not be used wherever we like. They must contribute significantly to the article and be connected to the article's prose is a meaningful way. Simply placing the image on an article doesn't do that. Please do not restore this image to those articles again. If you have questions, let me know. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 23:35, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1972, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jethro Tull. 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) 10:30, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1958

Please stop adding pictures. These aren't galleries of modern pretty people. Drmies (talk) 20:30, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1949, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Roger Taylor (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) 11:40, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Bob3458. 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]

Disambiguation link notification for December 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1964, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lee Evans (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 18:06, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians who like Black Mirror

Hey! I saw that you edited the article Black Mirror and thought maybe you would be interested in this new user category I created?-🐦Do☭torWho42 (⭐) 11:04, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Led Zeppelin IV, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carol King (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 29

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1972, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Common (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Bob3458. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit reversions to Animal House

Hi Bob,

You've twice reverted my edit to Animal House without comment. The text currently says that it was the highest grossing comedy of its era. I added a citation to box office mojo the first time I edited that shows it was the second highest grossing comedy. You've left the citation in but reverted the text. Can you suggest an alternative citation that backs up your textual assertion? What is making you confident that this is the highest grossing comedy?

Martyn Lovell (talk) 18:47, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve added a source to back up my claim.

Disambiguation link notification for March 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John Landis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Zucker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:08, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June 2019

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to Talk:2001: A Space Odyssey (film), even if you intend to fix them later. Your edits have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. David J Johnson (talk) 21:24, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to 2019 New Year Honours, appears to have been inappropriate, and has been reverted. Please feel free to use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Not a Knight Bachelor, but a KCMG, & already listed there. David Biddulph (talk) 21:21, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Benny Hill Show, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Syndication (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:34, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 20

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Marty Feldman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ITV.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:11, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:44, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Party affiliations in BLPs

Hi Bob3458. I noticed a recent edit of yours at Steven Crowder, which added "Republican" as a party affiliation in his infobox. The edit was just reverted by User:Iamreallygoodatcheckers, rightfully I think. Glancing at your contribs, it seems many of your recent edits have added political affiliations to biographies of living people without a source to support them. Could you please review your work and either remove unverifiable affiliations or add reliable sources if available. I am happy to help if you'd like. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:50, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand removing the Steven Crowder one but most of the other ones are sourced with the page to back them up. Bob3458 (talk) 21:15, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good point! It would have been real smart of me to have checked for that before I posted here. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 21:24, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

Hello, I'm Le Marteau. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Jimmy Dore, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Le Marteau (talk) 02:50, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do not add uncited political claims to BLPs

You have now been reverted twice for adding to the BLP of Democrat Marquita Bradshaw the category "American democratic socialist."[2][3] The article does not support this claim nor can I find any RS that supports it. If you do find such an RS, add that information and citation to the article itself. HouseOfChange (talk) 22:57, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Political party

Please stop reverting my whole edits on Seth MacFarlane page. I know you just want to add the political party but it’s actually redundant. So, please stop reverting it cause you’re also undoing a lot of stuff as well. Ziggy Coltrane (talk) 15:12, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Links to social media profiles

I essentially undid an edit of yours and wanted to explain my reasoning, since it seems like you add a lot of social media profiles in articles. Per WP:ELMIN, if someone has an official website as well as a number of social media profiles that are themselves linked from the official website, only the official website should be linked. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:48, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Ian Black social media profiles

I undid your edit on Michael Ian Black.1 Per wp:ELp, Wikipedia:External links/Perennial websites, social media links should not be added to pages. I see there are many pages that you have added social media links to. --P37307 (talk) 00:13, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't realise social media links weren't allowed on pages

Its my fault I should have checked Bob3458 (talk) 00:18, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You keep reverting Michael Ian Black, excessive adding social media links. You need to revert your last reversion here and stop this behavior. I gave you the policies above and you acknowledged them. You seem to be doing this to many, many pages. Others have warned you. I don't want to have escalate for admin intervention. Please familiarize yourself with WP:ELMIN,Wikipedia:External links/Perennial websites, and if you are being paid to make all these volumize PR type edits, several Wikipedia policies and guidelines exist to combat conflict of interest editing, including Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. Please be aware. P37307 (talk) 04:06, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

External links gone wild

Bob3458, there are guidelines related to WP:External links that tell you when NOT to add Twitter and Instagram to the External links sections. Please read before you add any more in your current spree. See WP:TWITTER-EL & WP:INSTAGRAM. Grorp (talk) 03:16, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also read Help:Minor edit because you've been tagging all your work as "minor edit" when it is not. Grorp (talk) 03:20, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mismarking edits as "Minor edit"

Hi Bob3458! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you.

Some recent examples of your edits that are not minor edits but which were marked as such, include: Seth_MacFarlane, John_Mulaney, Saturday_Live_(British_TV_programme), The_Nightmare_Before_Christmas, and Saturday_Night_Live.

Since the default notification setting for Wikipedia accounts is "Hide minor edits from the watchlist", unless someone has changed their preferences to show minor edits then minor-marked edits can easily go unreviewed. It would be a serious matter to deliberately mark something minor in order to avoid review.

Please read Help:Minor edit.

Grorp (talk) 01:31, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comedian

Please stop...... Here at Wikipedia, the definition of Comedian is Someone who has a history of Stand-up performances. Hawn never did stand-up and most of the edits you've had made recently are wrong, please revert yourself. Thanx, - FlightTime (open channel) 22:41, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well technically she was a comedian in the Laugh-In days and that category isn't just for people that do stand-up comedy as their is already a category for that (you can prove me wrong if I am) Bob3458 (talk) 23:09, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, here at Wikipedia comedian means stand-up. You can go against MOS, your choice. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please show me where it says that it is the Wikipedia definition of a comedian?

If I'm wrong then I'll eat my words. Bob3458 (talk) 23:31, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bob3458: Your answer is right at the top of the category you tried to add, Category:American women comedians. Grorp (talk) 01:28, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alright fair enough I was in the wrong Bob3458 (talk) 01:33, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

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 and 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. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:24, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Important Notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

––FormalDude (talk) 01:59, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023

Hello, I'm FormalDude. I noticed that you recently removed content from Justin Roiland 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 your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ––FormalDude (talk) 06:52, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Much better

Thanks for finding the neweurope.eu source; it was a much better choice. Just as a note, the "minor edit" marker is for things like typos, not changing citation sources. Please check out Help:Minor edit to see when it is most appropriate to mark an edit as 'minor'. Many wiki editors don't receive notices of changes when the minor-edit is checked, so it's important not to overuse it. Grorp (talk) 02:12, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Garry Shandling, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Don't add redundant categories. For example, the entire category category:Jewish American male comedians is already included in category:American male comedians Meters (talk) 00:34, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at George Carlin. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

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

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Stop doing this. If he's in Category:Comedians from New York City he's already in Category:Comedians from New York (state) Meters (talk) 00:51, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The first one I can understand but the George Carlin one I don't feel was a disruptive edit Bob3458 (talk) 00:56, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New York City is in New York State. A "comedian from New York City" is already a member of "comedians from New York State". If you can't be bothered to look at the categories to see what is included you should stop adding categories. Meters (talk) 03:58, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Harry Shearer. Enough. You've been warned. The problem has been explained. And yet you still insisting on adding these redundant categories. Meters (talk) 04:09, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You keep adding the Category:American film directors to certain pages, even though it is overcategorized and redundant. I agree with User:Meters to please stop these disruptive edits. Thank you. 2001:569:507E:FB00:A03F:CA05:F080:E5A1 (talk) 17:05, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You also said that you would stop overcategorizing, but your recent contributions have shown the opposite. Please stop, or you may be blocked from editing. 2001:569:507E:FB00:A03F:CA05:F080:E5A1 (talk) 20:20, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See the thing is I don’t realise I’m overcategorizing, I have autism so maybe I don’t pick up the things quickly enough but I do appreciate you telling me. Bob3458 (talk) 20:43, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Overcategorization for more information if you need it. 2001:569:507E:FB00:A03F:CA05:F080:E5A1 (talk) 20:46, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, this is exactly what I need!

I’ve been trying to find the information but couldn’t Bob3458 (talk) 20:48, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, and good luck with editing. Make sure not to overcategorize though. 2001:569:507E:FB00:A03F:CA05:F080:E5A1 (talk) 20:50, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed your recent contributions, and they show your unwillingness to stop overcategorizing. You said before that you would stop overcategorizing, yet you still continue to do so. You may be blocked from editing if you continue this disruptive behavior. 2001:569:507E:FB00:9D04:805D:9500:427E (talk) 18:58, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you show me where I overcategorized and I’ll remove it. Bob3458 (talk) 19:03, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve tired my goddamn best not to overcategorize and I think I’ve done ok with it but if I’ve made a mistake then I’m more than willing to listen Bob3458 (talk) 19:10, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=George_Lucas&diff=prev&oldid=1161214753; in this edit on George Lucas, you added the Category:American film directors when he's already in the subcategory Film directors from California — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:507E:FB00:9D04:805D:9500:427E (talk) 19:18, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve removed it Bob3458 (talk) 19:20, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=George_Clooney&diff=prev&oldid=1160997696, you also did it again with this edit on George Clooney. 2001:569:507E:FB00:29AF:978C:B64B:DAA2 (talk) 19:52, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Again I’ve now removed it Bob3458 (talk) 19:57, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You really need to stop this. Meters (talk) 20:06, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In my defence, those edits were from before I realised I was overcategorizing but I’ve now changed them back

If you point out anymore of my mistakes I’ll happily change them back Bob3458 (talk) 20:15, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing your errors after we point them out to you is not a solution. Other editors should not have to double check all of your work. You know there has been a problem. Why have you not gone back and checked your previous work? I suggest that you go back and check all of your previous edits now for similar errors, and stop adding categories to articles.

Here's an error you made today [4]. You added Category:American television writers to an article that was already in the parent category Category:American television writer stubs‎ Meters (talk) 20:22, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you are right I should be more accountable Bob3458 (talk) 20:32, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You said that you have been trying your best not to overcategorize, but [5] this edit on Seth Rogen shows otherwise when you added the categories 21st-century American philanthropists and 21st-century Canadian philanthropists when he is already in the categories American philanthropists and Canadian philanthropists. Another user saw this mistake and already fixed it, but the point is that they shouldn't have to fix these mistakes for you. Do you really want to be blocked from editing? 2001:569:507E:FB00:44C1:AA0D:CC56:7AD1 (talk) 17:35, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly I don’t even realise I’m doing it so I’m just gonna stop editing categories because I’m causing harm without realise it and I’m gonna get blocked if I keep doing it

Like I know it sounds like I’m lying but I honestly don’t realise and the more I say it the less convincing it becomes so I’m gonna stop unless I know I'm not Bob3458 (talk) 17:46, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I’m really trying my best not to overcategorize and I’ve reverted some of my mistakes but it seems I keep getting it wrong no matter what my intentions are. Bob3458 (talk) 17:56, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Enough. At this point I don't care if you are lying or this is simply WP:CIR, It does not appear that you are able to correctly add categories. I don't think you should be adding any categories, even if you are sure they are OK. Just stop adding categories. I just removed your Category:Jewish American writers from Andrew Bergman. That is a parent category of no less than three categories you added, Category:Jewish American dramatists and playwrights‎, Category:Jewish American screenwriters‎ and Category:Jewish American comedy writers‎. Meters (talk) 18:04, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your "retired" banner. We're not trying to chase you off of Wikipedia, we just want you to stop over categorizing. Meters (talk) 18:15, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Bob3458. Thank you. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:22, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 18:19, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's an incident board discussion¹ about this account and its prior username Bob3458 that was recently changed to Potter45. P37307 (talk) 00:29, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request for unblock

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).

Potter45 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I don’t expect to be forgiven or unblocked but I just want to apologise for my actions.

Truth is that I created a new account to avoid scrutiny and pretend to be new to the website, I also deliberately lied to another editor that it was a new account which I deeply regret but I was getting overly stressed over the categorisation disputes that I just did it in the heat of the moment, not justifying my actions by any means but it was just how I felt at the time. I also acknowledge that was too obsessed with categories and the other editors were 100% right about their concerns over it although I will admit that have remove some of the redundant categories on the pages I edited before I got blocked.

I’ve done a lot of reflecting since I got blocked and I’m more aware of why I got blocked but I’m also aware that it isn’t easy or even possible to get unblocked in situations like mine since I’ve acted dishonestly so I totally understand if you don’t want to unblock me or don’t think I’m convincing but I promise I won’t make any mistakes like this again if you give me a second chance.

Decline reason:

"I don’t expect to be forgiven or unblocked ..." OK, then, noted. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:24, 23 July 2023 (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.

Potter45 (talk) 19:59, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Look I really am sorry

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).

Potter45 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My previous unblock request was me being as brutally honest about my actions as I could while also acknowledging that it isn’t easy to rectify them.

I stand by everything I said in my previous unblock request but yes I would like a second chance if granted and I was just being honest that it might not happen.

I should also acknowledge that I have autism and learning difficulties so maybe the way I worded things doesn’t always make sense. Potter45 (talk) 10:01, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I think that the standard offer is the only pathway forward here. 331dot (talk) 09:27, 24 July 2023 (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 received your email, I do not discuss Wikipedia matters via email. If you make another unblock request, be it now or in six months, someone else will review it. 331dot (talk) 14:35, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request

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).

Potter45 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I’m fully aware of my mistakes and I’d like a chance to prove I’ve learned from them. I've previously admitted my wrongdoings very bluntly and explained them in other block appeals but I’m also aware that these types of issues aren’t easy to rectify in the eyes of the editors so I understand if you don’t want to unblock me. I went about it in a horrible way and I regret that but I think I’ve learned from my mistakes and would like a second chance if you think I should. Potter45 (talk) 15:08, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Personally, I am a great believer in unblocking to give another chance to blocked editors who accept what they have done wrong and undertake not to do the same again. However, there is about zero chance of other administrators agreeing to unblocking your account under present cicumstances, and I am not going to take action which I know full well would be against a solid consensus. I think the best advice to you is that already given above, to take the standard offer, which essentially means waiting for at least six months and then making another unblock request. JBW (talk) 20:23, 3 August 2023 (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.