User talk:Isad123

Nomination of Bailey Markum for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bailey Markum 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/Bailey Markum 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. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:14, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BAILEY MARKUM IS A REAL ACTRESS! SO DONT BE A FEMALE DOG AND STOP TRYING TO DELETE IT. SHE WAS CHOSEN BY THE CASTING DIRECTOR OF Victorious and iCarly!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isad123 (talk • contribs) 03:31, 26 November 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]

Please make your arguments for retention of the article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bailey Markum and see the reasoning there for why an article on this person is not appropriate at this time. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:44, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not appropriate at this time my male donkey! Shall we wait until she's become super famous for you to acknowledge her existence? Of course not!!! As she is an up and coming star there needs to be a page dedicated to her so that by the time she becomes like Ariana Grande, Victoria Justice, and Miranda Cosgrove Wikipeida would have been the first place to have a biography for her. The casting director of both Victorious and iCarly handpicked Her out of thousands!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hopefully you know that's a huge deal and she's going to be the star of her own show. So instead of acting like an old grandpa who doesn't know anything about the 21st century and what is big and what is popular just be quiet and stop deleting the page. NO RELIABLE SOURCES?!!!!! Are you really freaking retarded?! The girl was on tv if that's not enough proof then go watch it yourself you dumb male donkey and call up her agent and why not call the casting director too. You are insulting both Nickelodeon and the casting director, Dan Schneider because you don't think Bailey has enough credible resources when she was handpicked by them!!! There's your proof. Now go in a hole and die. Isad123 (talk) 04:03, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please make your arguments for retention of the article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bailey Markum and see the reasoning there for why an article on this person is not appropriate at this time. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:26, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If I want to delete your dumb comment I will. You're so racist this is just because she's white.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Isad123 (talk • contribs) 04:32, 26 November 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]

Deleting the AfD template and the AfD discussion page is not permitted. Don't do that. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:37, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

November 2014

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Bailey Markum. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:38, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did on User talk:Geraldo Perez. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:41, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Henry Danger. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:18, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's not incorrect...honestly. Go look yourself. Go and check IMDB. I say this very cooly. Isad123 (talk) 01:38, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the end credits of the episode in question by viewing the episode as it exists on iTunes. The actual credits as listed is authoratative and is what IMDb editors are supposed to get info from but sometimes they get it wrong. She was credited as "Featuring" "Bailey Marie Markum" along with "Elizabeth Triplett". Not credited as "starring" "Special guest star", Guest star" or "co-starring". "co-starring" and "featuring" are minor credits not worth a mention in Wiki articles about the show. She was definitely not credited with the major credit of "Special guest star" which is what you added to the article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:11, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. You must have a lot of time. I'm pretty sure she's more deserving of a page then say users of Wikipedia. Like have they done anything stand out? No. Does anyone know their name except themselves? No. Maybe there shouldn't be one for users...like you..and me to. That's why I don't have one. (: Isad123 (talk) 02:38, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive behaviour. Your behaviour is verging on harassment. Wikipedia prides itself on providing a safe environment for its collaborators, and harassing edits, such as the one you made to User talk:Geraldo Perez, potentially compromise that safe environment. If you continue behaving like this, you may be blocked from editing. Bogus message on my talk page for purposes of harassment Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:02, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also copying that warning with my name attached isn't funny nor clever, ~~Stop being a dick otherwise I'll have you blocked which btw won't be hard!~~. –Davey2010 • (talk) 03:11, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bailey Markum. AmaryllisGardener ^talk 03:30, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

maybe you should block the guy who called me a "dick" and threatened me. That's against Wikipedia policy. I mean he's a high ranked editor. You can't be like that as an established credible editor. Even if he slashes it, it doesn't undo the human conscience and feelings. His name is Davey2010. He commented right before yours. Isad123 (talk) 03:47, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't wise of him to do that, but he doesn't have warnings piled up on his talk page. Also, you called me a "b****" and then took that back, so why be so hypocritical? Also, you have been reported to AIV by Davey. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 03:52, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

no I didnt i didn't mean to take it back but I didn't write that word how preposterous! How infuriating! All I wrote was b1+ch. that is a b, a one, a plus, a c, and an h.

Isad123 (talk) 03:57, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can read 1337, now stop the trolling. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 03:58, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

offensive. You can't accuse me of that! And no you don't. What I did was not the b word in 1377 it is "8!7(|-|" in 1377. So you just lied. I see why my teachers say "don't trust anything you read on Wikipedia."

Isad123 (talk) 04:07, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are different types of leet. If it wasn't "b****", then would you mind telling me what it did mean? --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 04:07, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Most definitely! I accidentally typed those keys when my arm slipped. No profanity was intended.

Isad123 (talk) 04:12, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Isad123, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Seahorseruler ^{(Talk Page) (Contribs)} 04:37, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Materialscientist (talk) 11:14, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]