User talk:Darunia02

Darunia02, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi Darunia02! 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 experienced editors like Jtmorgan (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

July 2016[edit]

Hello. Some of your recent genre changes, such as the one you made to Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS and Wii U, have conflicted with our neutral point of view and verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend you seek consensus for certain edits by discussing the matter on the article's talk page. Thank you. – // Hounder4 // 00:40, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Moving categories[edit]

Please do not move (rename) categories without discussion; there is a process for this, set out at WP:Categories for discussion. You recently moved Category:Organized crime video games to Category:Crime video games, but I have speedily reversed this under WP:G4, as that proposal was already made and rejected at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_September_13#Category:Organized_crime_video_games. You would have seen a link to that discussion if you had looked at the category talk page. – Fayenatic London 08:45, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Changing video game genres without consensus or reference[edit]

Not to discourage you or anything, but please do not change genres without establishing a consensus or providing a reliable source, as you did to Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS and Wii U; same applies with your edits to Super Smash Bros. Brawl. If you believe that the Super Smash Bros. games are not fighting games, then I suggest that you should discuss that in the talk page (either at Talk:Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS and Wii U or Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl) before changing genres. Thanks. – // Hounder4 // 17:26, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

Add a reliable source and information to the article to support a category addition please. --The1337gamer (talk) 06:55, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016[edit]

Please refrain from changing genres, as you did to The Usual Suspects, without providing a source or establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Thank you. SummerPhD^v2.0 12:08, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 22:40, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from changing genres, as you did to The Godfather, without providing a source or establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Thank you. — Gareth Griffith-Jones | The Welsh | Buzzard | 16:13, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to change genres without discussion or sources, as you did at Das Boot, you may be blocked from editing. DonIago (talk) 13:21, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:War thriller films has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:War thriller films, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 13:23, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:War action films has been nominated for discussion[edit]

Category:War action films, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. - Gothicfilm (talk) 01:30, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Drama novels[edit]

Likewise, please see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 August 27 for Category:Drama novels. – Fayenatic London 09:51, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or change other editors' legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 August 26. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:09, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle doesn't seem to have a specific warning for blanking an entire deletion discussion, which is why I've warned you for a talk page violation. I realize debates on Wikipedia can get heated and stressful, but edits like this are not constructive and will only result in sanctions for disruptive editing. If you don't like how a deletion discussion is going, you should make logical arguments in support of your position and quote the relevant policies. Other editors will hopefully be swayed. If not, then move on. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:34, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

November 2016[edit]

Hello. Some of your recent genre changes, such as the one you made to Terminator 2: Judgment Day, have conflicted with our neutral point of view and verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend you seek consensus for certain edits by discussing the matter on the article's talk page. Thank you. Betty Logan (talk) 13:56, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Darunia02. 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]

November 2016[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on The Sopranos. 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. Sundayclose (talk) 03:54, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016[edit]

Please refrain from changing genres, as you did to Metroid Prime, without providing a source or establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Thank you. – // Hounder4 // 12:37, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to change genres without discussion or sources, as you did at Super Smash Bros. Melee, you may be blocked from editing. – Hounder4 03:00, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

January 2017[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at The Usual Suspects. The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 17:58, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Undiscussed genre changes to Super Smash Bros. Melee[edit]

You seem to disagree with me that Super Smash Bros. Melee is a fighting game, and you did not participate in talk page discussions concerning your edits. I would ask you to take the opportunity to discuss your edits and seek consensus in the talk page before you changing genres. If you keep on changing genres in articles without discussion, then your edits would be considered disruptive and you will be blocked from editing. The talk page is at Talk:Super Smash Bros. Melee#Genre changes without consensus. Thanks. – Hounder4 15:31, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2017[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Jaws (film). You have been warned multiple times about your genre-related edits, but you continue to make mistakes such as adding genre-related categories to films which are unsupported by the article text. Please stop immediately. DonIago (talk) 18:53, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 request an unblock 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 ~~~~}}. Drmies (talk) 01:42, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from changing genres, as you did to Heat (1995 film), without providing a source or establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. How many times do you have to be warned about this before you get the message? Repeated changes to genres without consensus is going to get you blocked again. Please stop. The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 00:50, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to change genres without discussion or sources, as you did at Seven (1995 film), you may be blocked from editing. The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 13:29, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at The Silence of the Lambs (film). The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 16:44, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stop your disruptive editing or you are looking at a long term block. If you are involved in a content dispute seek consensus on the relevant talk page or take a look at WP:DR for other suggestions. A quick look at your editing history and talk page shows that this has been an ongoing problem and that you have been warned repeatedly by other editors. No further warnings on this subject will be forthcoming. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:29, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2017[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 request an unblock 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 ~~~~}}. NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:06, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017[edit]

Your recent edit to Once Upon a Time in America which added a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. It has been reverted Gareth Griffith-Jones, The Welsh Buzzard (Talk) 12:34, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Once Upon a Time in America. 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. Gareth Griffith-Jones, The Welsh Buzzard (Talk) 08:36, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you change genres in pages without discussion or sources, as you did at The Godfather Part II. The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 01:08, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. –Cognissonance (talk) 14:20, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

June 2017[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 6 months for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 request an unblock 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 ~~~~}}. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:40, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Fantasy war films has been nominated for deletion[edit]

Category:Fantasy war films has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 05:03, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]