September 2014

Hello, I'm Discospinster. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Tomodachi Collection, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ... discospinster _talk 23:05, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with upload of File:Gumball.png

Thanks for uploading File:Gumball.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

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

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:06, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

M briglia05 (talk) 14:56, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Hibernia Park, Pennsylvania

Hi, I'm Sulfurboy. M briglia05, thanks for creating Hibernia Park, Pennsylvania!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. /

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Sulfurboy (talk) 22:01, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Hibernia Park, Pennsylvania

The article Hibernia Park, Pennsylvania has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Park entails no significance signs of notability and makes no differentiation from any other park

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Baseball Watcher 23:25, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Elmore california

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Elmore california, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 02:19, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Cumulus (association)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Cumulus (association) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:35, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your message at Talk:Cumulus (association) - The article was tagged for deletion for not having enough context to identify the subject. "it did not have much in it anyway" only supports the argument that it should be deleted, it is not a reason against deleting it. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:40, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015

Hello, I'm Inks.LWC. Your recent edit to the page Flash flood warning appears to have added incorrect information, so I have removed it for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. 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. Inks.LWC (talk) 01:20, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:All of New Jersey.jpeg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:All of New Jersey.jpeg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status and its source. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously.

If you did not create this work entirely yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. You will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. Please refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file.

Please add this information by editing the image description page. If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nick⁠—⁠^Contact/_Contribs 18:42, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, All of New Jersey

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, All of New Jersey. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – New Jersey. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at New Jersey – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Nick⁠—⁠^Contact/_Contribs 18:43, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: How to create a draft (July 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was:

This submission seems to be a test edit and not an article worthy of an encyclopedia. Please use the sandbox for any editing tests, but do not submit for review until you have an article that you want reviewed for inclusion in Wikipedia. Thank you.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:How to create a draft and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sulfurboy (talk) 22:56, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! M briglia05, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Sulfurboy (talk) 22:56, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: How to create a draft (July 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Non-dropframe was:

This submission seems to be a test edit and not an article worthy of an encyclopedia. Please use the sandbox for any editing tests, but do not submit for review until you have an article that you want reviewed for inclusion in Wikipedia. Thank you.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:How to create a draft and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

--Non-Dropframe _talk 19:58, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! M briglia05, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! --Non-Dropframe _talk 19:58, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Stevecash83

Hello M briglia05,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Stevecash83 for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Trivialist (talk) 22:49, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit to .exe

Hello, and thank you for your recent contribution. While the content of your edit may be true, I have removed it because its depth or nature of detail are not consistent with our objectives as an encyclopedia. I recognize that your edit was made in good faith and hope you will familiarize yourself with what Wikipedia is not so we may collaborate in the future. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 12:51, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited .com, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Commercial. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:38, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

December 2015

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to 9 (number), but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. - DVdm (talk) 09:44, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:How to create a draft concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:How to create a draft, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:49, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:How to create a draft

Hello, M briglia05. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "How to create a draft".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 01:39, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

English letter names

Hi. Would you kindly relent on changing the spelled-out names of English letters? I've been reverting you but you haven't seemed to notice. I've done that on the basis of English alphabet#Letter names (which is sourced from the OED) and WP:RESPELL (which details that, for instance, you should use "ee" to indicate a /i/ sound when using the respelling key and not "e", which indicates the sound in "bet" instead). LjL (talk) 16:26, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making test edits to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism, which, under Wikipedia policy, can lead to being blocked from editing. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:51, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit to Gnat

Hello, and thank you for your recent contribution. I appreciate the effort you made for our project, but unfortunately I had to undo your edit because I believe the article was better before you made that change. Feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions. Thank you! DemocraticLuntz (talk) 19:27, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2016

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to O. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This is a reiteration of what you previously did that you were warned about. You are again doing it on several articles. You cannot just change letter names into your favorite spelling just because you like and/or it resembles existing words, even though the reliable sources cited give a different spelling. You have been reverted by me and other editors multiple times on multiple letter articles; you must stop. LjL (talk) 16:04, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Playing by the rules

Hi.

You seem to have some problems with our rules. Maybe you don't know what they are, but we do have rules, and if you want to keep contributing, you must respect them. Perhaps you could have a look at this page: Welcome to Wikipedia. You will find a section there under the heading Our "Rules". For starters, there is a link to the page Five pillars, which gives a brief overview of our core principles. But it wouldn't hurt to follow the other links as well and study what you find there.

Anyone can edit Wikipedia and contribute to this project. You don't have to be an expert or have a Ph.D. That is a rare thing in this world, but I believe it is very valuable. It is what made Wikipedia the greatest source of information on this planet, and completely free at that. But that is only possible because we, the editors, pay attention to the rules that make this collaboration possible. --Lambiam 21:57, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ANI report

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

I did see your message, but sorry, that's too little, too late. You're not correcting misspellings, you're introducing errors with respect to what the provided sources actually say, and you've been reverted and warned multiple times about it, but you never discussed it. Now it's escalated to the ANI, so let's discuss it there. LjL (talk) 15:08, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning for making unsourced changes

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:19, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about disabling the Wikipedia collections tool

Thank you for using the collections feature in Wikipedia beta! Due to technical and moderation issues, we will be turning off this experimental feature. Your collections will be available for viewing and export until March 1st. If you would like to save your collection as links on a special Wikipedia page, please fill out the following form. If you are interested in giving your feedback about Wikipedia Collections please do so here.

Thanks,

Jon Katz
Product manager, Wikimedia Foundation
Jkatz (WMF) (talk) 23:56, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Building game

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Building game requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Qpalzmmzlapq | talk | contribs 23:15, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Really Scary for Xbox 360

The article Really Scary for Xbox 360 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. The1337gamer (talk) 08:30, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

January 2017

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. –Davey2010^Talk 19:00, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2017

I do not try to vandalize Wikipedia, I try to fix grammar mistakes. User talk:M briglia05 12:46 PM, January 24, 2017 (EST)

February 2017

I have found missing things in Mickey Mouse, I fixed them, but then you removed the missing things that were there. User talk:M briglia05 10:37 AM, February 14, 2017 (EST)

March 2017

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Elvis Presley. 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. Laser brain (talk) 14:35, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but it appears you have written or added to an article about yourself. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add to an existing article about yourself, please propose the changes on its talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was my page deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss it with the deleting administrator. Thank you. - Happysailor ^(Talk) 01:36, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2017

Hello, I'm Dan D. Ric. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Burger King, 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! 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. Dan D. Ric (talk) 17:42, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Burger King. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:37, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please read

I've looked through your edits. Some are good, some are not, and many are downright disruptive. You've been warned about this before. Please consider this your last warning. If you continue to edit the way you have been, another trip to WP:ANI will be in order. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:49, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adele

Hi M briglia05, whenever you copy text from one Wikipedia page to another, please provide attribution as described in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. This is a legal requirement. Also, if you think a page is at the wrong title, please follow the procedure described at Wikipedia:Requested moves.

Thank you, Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 04:07, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. 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} 02:56, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To get unblocked you need to convince an admin:

You will not write/recreate any articles without understanding what notability is.
You understand what a reliable source is.
You understand how to use article talk pages.

You can start by explaining how you will edit differently if you are unblocked. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:05, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I Object

I wasn't making disruptive edits, I was fixing errors that you made. Everyone is saying that Wikipedia isn't always correct, so, I try to fix stuff. User talk:M briglia05 10:33, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unreasonably Blocked

There's no reason to block me, because I've been trying to help you, even though it doesn't have any importance, I'm still trying to help all of you. But you just don't want me to just so that you're not always right, and I try to fix it all. User talk:M briglia05 8:54, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Repeatedly creating an article about you only helps you. And given the quality of the majority of your edits, coming back after a couple years have passed would be beneficial for both you and Wikipedia. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:52, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request 29 August 2022

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).

M briglia05 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This account's been indefinitely blocked for the past five years. I've learned so much about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines since then, and I've contributed good edits under a different username since May 15, 2020. Yeah, I'll admit it; it was pretty stupid of me to try to claim the ownership of an account that's currently blocked, and I wish I hadn't done that, but the original quote by NeilN clearly states, "And given the quality of the majority of your edits, coming back after a couple years have passed would be beneficial for both you and Wikipedia." I created my new account just a little over three years after this quote was published. Believe it or not, I actually wanna get rid of this account entirely because it contains parts of my personal information, including the names of some of my relatives. Even though I've garnered controversy for my recent proposals to certain policies, I'd be more than happy to make good contributions to Wikipedia.

Decline reason:

You JUST admitted to having a sock in your unblock, which has now been blocked. There's no chance that unblocking you would benefit Wikipedia at all. Bear in mind if you create another sock to bypass your block it will be even less likely you'll be unblocked. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:48, 29 August 2022 (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.

This is quite the plot twist. Try not to dig any holes to fall into, and wait for a standard offer. I disagree that an unblock will be a detriment to Wikipedia. With the exceptions of edit warring and behavior (that I can only hope change), I'm not convinced that their contributions are not a benefit. Rick, if I may, I'd like you to consider this be changed to a block with an expiration. SWinxy (talk) 19:15, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SWinxy: Yeah, I learned from my mistakes from edit warring twice, the latter of which I misinterpreted as vandalism and failed to assume good faith. Both situations took place about a year apart, so I knew more policies in the latter situation and knew how to handle the temporary block I received from my actions. M briglia05 (talk) 19:33, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SWinxy: If they do take the standard offer, wait 6 months or so and file an unblock request, that could be lifted then. I won't be changing their block to a timed one at the moment however. RickinBaltimore (talk) 22:46, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's what I thought as well, @SWinxy: but seeing their rather immature disruption on this talk page, refactoring multiple posts, screwing up wikilinks, and pretending that it was about removing personal information, has pretty much changed my opinion. L337m4n / MB05, if you believe that this or this or this is acceptable per WP:TPO (especially in light of your comment here), you probably need to take some more time away from Wikipedia. --bonadea contributions talk 17:37, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm.. I wasn't even aware that they were doing that. I don't know why they didn't remove the sections outright per WP:OWNTALK, where it is valid (don't try it), but going against TPO is not alright. What bonadea said: take more time away from here. Maybe you'll decide to return in two, three years, but only after errs are acknowledged to not recur. Safe travels, KK, and respect the block. SWinxy (talk) 18:12, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@RickinBaltimore, Bonadea, and SWinxy: Okay, thanks, guys, I'll be sure to take some time off of Wikipedia, as well as doing more research into the policies and guidelines when I come back, but I'd really appreciate it if I could at least get some of these names off of this talk page. I don't exactly see how removing the names of my relatives, as well as my real name and location, is immature, but whatever the policies say, I guess. Thanks again, guys. Goodbye, everyone. M briglia05 (talk) 18:41, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do not refactor other users' posts. --bonadea contributions talk 18:34, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]