User talk:Digitslain12

Welcome![edit]

Hi Digitslain12! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! I dream of horses ^{(Contribs) (Talk)} 20:07, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2023 New York City FC season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sean Johnson. 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) 06:05, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:United States v Jamaica (2002 FIFA World Cup qualification) has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:United States v Jamaica (2002 FIFA World Cup qualification). Thanks! Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:53, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: United States v Jamaica (2002 FIFA World Cup qualification) has been accepted[edit]

United States v Jamaica (2002 FIFA World Cup qualification), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:51, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023-24 Vegas Golden Knights[edit]

I get your enthusiasm, but sections should be progressively unhidden as they come into effect, not all unveiled at once; empty tables look bad on the page. Additionally, for draft picks, positions shouldn't be linked, and trade notes aren't included, as we've done on past season pages. Please review past precedents before jumping to be "first" as too many others do. The Kip (talk) 18:52, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. I'm not 100% familiar with the formatting and probably wasn't aware of the hidden stuff. I guess we can fill in the draftees. Thanks and have a great day. Digitslain12 (talk) 20:11, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023[edit]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at El Tráfico, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Sounder Bruce 17:53, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 16[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2023 Sporting Kansas City season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jacob Davis.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notes on summaries and sources[edit]

Hey there, and thanks for your contributions to 2023 in the United States. I would like to request of you, however, to please reference your entires when you add them, as per the Wikipedia Reliable Sources policy. Also, please make sure to leave an edit summary; you can find more about this at our edit summary page. Thanks! InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 16:13, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again – with regard to your recent edits, please make sure to add a citation for every event. Your recent contributions to 2023 in the United States saw you add only one citation for CONCACAF, and no citations for neither the floods nor the Long Beach killer. Please make sure to add citations. It's your responsibility to add citations, and unsourced material can be removed at any time. Thank you. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 17:37, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of South Vietnam[edit]

Please use sources to back up your claims, I managed to find a source for the 2023 controversy at the "Flag of South Vietnam" article but I can't find it for the 2022 football match, please mention where you found this news.

A typical source looks like this:

<ref name="">{{cite web|url= |title= .|date=|accessdate= July 2023|author= |publisher= |language=en}}</ref>

You can copy this, fill in the fields, and state where you found both pieces of now unsourced information you added, otherwise I will add "{{Citation needed}}" tags to your additions. --Donald Trung (talk) 07:16, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 12[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2023–24 C.F. Monterrey season, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Maximiliano Meza.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Goal templates[edit]

The {{goal}} template has parameters to handle multiple goals that should be used instead of adding a redundant template (and thus generating a second icon). Simply change {{goal|50}}, {{goal|60}}</nowki> to <nowiki>{{goal|50||60}} in match reports. Sounder Bruce 21:09, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Soccer[edit]

Morocco in Beach Simonen1998 (talk) 00:58, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused. Can you explain? Digitslain12 (talk) 03:32, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 7[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of entertainment events at Crypto.com Arena, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Old Dominion.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:39, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask a dumb question because I just randomly found your account[edit]

how do you have so many edits in just 6 Months????? SupersaurYT (talk) 02:25, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Because I do a lot of things here. Yeah, that's really it. We're not really special for it though. Digitslain12 (talk) 03:08, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

what do you mean by we're? SupersaurYT (talk) 19:35, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia editors. They’re not that special just because they have so many edits. But just keep editing. 159.115.9.46 (talk) 21:27, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Goalies on NHL season pages[edit]

I noticed you adding info to the NHL season pages for teams. Please make sure you are are getting the goalie decisions correct. The decision goes to the goalie who allows the game winning goal (in a loss), or the goalie on the ice when the game winning goal is scored (in a win).

For example, on the Sharks page, you entered Blackwood on Nov 2 and Chrona on Nov 4, but those are both incorrect.

What actually happened was Kahkonen took the loss on Nov 4 (since he allowed the game winning goal), and Blackwood took the loss on Nov 6 (since he allowed the game winning goal). Canuck^{89 (Gab with me) or visit my user page} 08:53, November 5, 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation[edit]

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, then, if you wish to do so, respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AncientMinister2008. Thank you. – sbaio 14:32, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Response to "Should we block 2A01:CB14:1190:F700:C37:4410:CB62:B9D1?"[edit]

Responding to the message you left on my talk page: I don't have the ability to block someone, but I certainly think if he keeps it up it merits requesting a block. I left the standard-form admonition about edit warring on his talk page in order to establish that the proper warnings have been given, etc., so I assume the proper procedure is probably to wait a little while to see what the user does in response. It's certainly not our obligation to ferret back through the talk pages to find the old discussions. An anonymous new user isn't entitled just to say, in essence, "I wasn't part of that discussion so there's no consensus." (On the whole, I find the "it's called football" crowd to be very tiresome, though I try hard not to let my irritation show. No European reader is going to be confused or have any difficulty understanding an article that says soccer, just as no American reader is going to be confused by the use of British jargon like "kit" instead of "uniform" or "match" instead of "game.") 1995hoo (talk) 19:31, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah plus soccer links to association football anyways and the same could be said for things like pitch, kit, and match. But yeah have a great day. Digitslain12 (talk) 19:36, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at the personal attacks the IP editor just lobbed at both of us on his talk page. I'm not sure whether they warrant another warning, but either way, I don't have time this afternoon to submit a report and I have a funeral to attend on Saturday morning. If you're inclined to submit a report, ping me and I will certainly submit a statement of support as soon as I'm able to find time. 1995hoo (talk) 19:21, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Following up to say never mind—he's been blocked for 60 hours and the incivility and personal attacks were part of it. 1995hoo (talk) 20:09, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks man, was a little busy with life stuff but that was the right move made. Hopefully after two days he stops but I wouldn't be surprised if the user attacks us again. Digitslain12 (talk) 22:21, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023[edit]

Hello, I'm Glman. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. glman (talk) 17:17, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:GBAlph4 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GBAlph4. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Izno (talk) 05:46, 13 December 2023 (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).

Digitslain12 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello Inzo, I understand that I was blocked because abusing multiple accounts is against Wikipedia's rules. However, I would like to state that I have done nothing wrong with this account and have only positively contributed to the site. All I want to do is continue my good work and help make the site more accurate and readable. I apologize for abusing multiple accounts and just want a second chance. Many of my past mistakes such as getting emotional while editing and vandalizing pages are no longer a thing and I stick to being as objective as possible. If you don't want to unblock me, that's fine and I'll leave it at that. I hope you have a great day and continue to maintain the site. Thanks.

Decline reason:

What utter nonsense. Every edit violated WP:EVADE and WP:SOCK. Additionally, you demonstrated you aren't willing to be honest, over at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GBAlph4. Yamla (talk) 14:15, 13 December 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.

@Yamla: Hello Yamla, This is just a reply to you and your concerns. Yes, on the investigation page I failed to disclose crucial information and lied about my past that would have proven that I was the same user as GBAlph4. I did try to paint the IP and said user as seperate people despite knowing the full truth about that IP and that account being mine. It was a severe violation on my part and I evaded the blocks and broke the sockpuppet rule. All I wanted was to be back on the site so I could help out even if I knew I was violating the rules with my edits. I apologize for my behavior and will not do it again. If accepting this message means I'm no longer welcome on the site, then so be it. I'm glad I did my part to help out others as much as I could. However, if you all would like to consider a clean start based on my understanding and willingness to improve, you may do so.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Digitslain12 (talk • contribs)

Don't make unblock requests unless you intend to request unblocking. If you just want to communicate with Yamla, then do so. I'm fairly sure they can see this page, but you can ping them if they miss this. 331dot (talk) 17:39, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Digitslain12, you want out of your way to demonstrate your dishonesty just last month. Combined with your blatantly false claim that "I have done nothing wrong with this account", there's no path forward for you at this time. However, WP:SO is available to you. That requires six months with zero edits (so, no sooner than 2024-06-13). At that point, you would need to address the concerns that lead to your original block as well as your multiple attempts to deceive us here (falsely claiming you did nothing wrong with this account, falsely claiming you are unrelated to the other accounts). --Yamla (talk) 21:16, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Yamla Alright, deal and terms accepted. I will see you then, and I will explain everything there. I understand the offer and why I am in this place with consideration to my actions not only through my deceit, but also my unwillingness to confront past issues. Have a great day. Digitslain12 (talk) 21:23, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Zero edits. Not constant-edits-to-your-talk-page. --Yamla (talk) 21:40, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]