User talk:Mjlouisdbz14

April 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to This Time Around (song), did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: This Time Around (song) was changed by Mjlouisdbz14 (u) (t) blanking the page on 2009-04-26T11:16:46+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 11:16, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Genres

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please stop altering genres without providing sources for your claims, if this advise is ignored, blocks can be issued. — R ² 07:09, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Michael Jackson, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:47, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page George Sampson. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Icseaturtles★ 10:03, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to George Sampson. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 17:49, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Talk:Get Up On The Dance Floor/Headz Up. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. ^LeaveSleaves 17:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Suleman mirza

A tag has been placed on Suleman mirza requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but 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. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Mblumber (talk) 21:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add defamatory content, as you did to User:Mjlouisdbz14, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Language and graphics like that are totally unacceptable here, and any repetition is likely to get you blocked permanently. You are supposed to work constructively with other editors, and that doesn't help at all. I've also reverted your unnecessary comment at Talk:George Sampson. Rodhull andemu 21:36, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

lol haha how come every one sound like sciantists here

You might want to imagine how your attitude comes across if an administrator is deciding whether you should be blocked. This isn't a toy website, or a playground. It's serious, and constructive input is always welcome. Rodhull andemu 22:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

why are you looking on my page Rodhullandemu its like your trollin me lol bien here is more fun than youtube everyone seems to be soo smart and stuff and btw its my page i can put swear words on it if i like

Welcome

Mjlouisdbz14, you may have misunderstood the purpose of Wikipedia. This is quite a grown-up place, as you've noted, and is not at all like YouTube or MySpace. Some of the things you've written don't fit with how we do things here, so here is a message with some links you need to read:

Welcome!

Hello, Mjlouisdbz14, 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:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! ➲ redvers ^{throwing my arms around Paris} 10:30, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

well i do add things here that are useful but when i put a addition to michael jackson they deleated it

It's non-productive edits like this, this, this, this and this that are a problem. Because you are making such strange edits, when you make other edits, for instance to Michael Jackson, we have no way of knowing that you're trying to make good changes. Because all your other changes are unwelcome and because you don't give any clues about what you're trying to do, people will revert your edits.

The way to make changes and have them stick is to always use an edit summary explaining what you're trying to do; if people revert your edits, go to the article's talk page and explain, calmly and carefully, what you were trying to do; and always preview your edits before saving to make sure that you haven't broken anything (you broke the Michael Jackson page when you edited it, so this is one of the reasons it was reverted).

Finally, always sign your posts on talk pages (just put ~~~~ at the end and the system will sign them for you) and remember that you're talking to grown-ups on a grown-up encyclopedia: don't SHOUT IN ALL CAPITALS, try to spell things properly and keep all your posts relevant to article editing. ➲ redvers ^{throwing my arms around Paris} 07:47, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

lol im a huge fan of michael jackson and wouldnt dream of ruining his wiki page

Speedy deletion nomination of George Spamson

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as George Spamson, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Cxz111 (talk) 19:12, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

June 2009

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you create an inappropriate page, such as George Spamson, you will be blocked from editing. Rodhull andemu 19:14, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rodhullandemu

Rodhullandemu how did you find it and would you stop being such a twat you geek ok get a life

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive comments.
The next time you make a personal attack, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Rodhull andemu 19:21, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

then stop being so enoying

Stop the genre fiddling please

This is the last warning you will receive for continued genre changing without discussion or sources. If you choose to continue, you will be blocked from editing. — R ² 20:18, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

lol i can see ur a mj fan soo am i, but mj fans should stick together you are a discrace to us mj fans and michael

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 09:05, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for This edit, even if you then delete it, is unacceptable, and I've already warned you about being civil to other editors. In addition, your edits against consensus are continually disruptive. I had considered an indefinite block, but decided to give you a chance to change your attitude.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Rodhull andemu 13:29, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

she says i am the one but the kid is not my son

f you if you hate michael jackson

More genre fiddling, your on your way to an indefinite block

This is the last warning you will receive for continued genre changing without discussion or sources. If you choose to continue, you will be blocked from editing. — R ² 14:13, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

what did i do now? god --Mjlouisdbz14 (talk) 16:09, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This and this. Please, just stop doing it. — R ² 16:54, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ok i went to the dissgusion--Mjlouisdbz14 (talk) 19:26, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use talk pages such as Talk:Thriller – Live for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article. They are not to be used as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. — Please comment R ² 14:54, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

realist2 do you realized what happened michael died and the last thing to do is tell me off while im greaving so stfu and get lost!!!!--Mjlouisdbz14 (talk) 10:24, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

July 2009

Please do not attack other editors, which you did here: user talk:realist2. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 01:54, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

he is a fake fan of michael jackson--Mjlouisdbz14 (talk) 01:55, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to List of honorific titles in popular music, you will be blocked from editing. Your last chance. Next time, you're out of here. Rodhull andemu 18:37, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rodhullandemu get a life all you do is sit at the computer and see when you can be a little grass honestly get out more. michael jackson is the king of all music --Mjlouisdbz14 (talk) 18:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Being a Michael Jackson fan does not give you permission to vandalise our articles. I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that you are more trouble than you're worth here, and I remind you once more of our civility policy. You are on thin ice. Rodhull andemu 18:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

what eva --Mjlouisdbz14 (talk) 20:33, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

could you edit michael jacksons sales please here is a list which say he has sold 750 million thanks

please could you change michael jackson sales they don't seem right it cant be 350 all these sources say he has sold 750 million his offical website and sony records have also said this they can not be lying

http://www.michaeljackson.com/ie/news/michael-jacksons-it-be-presented-theaters-around-world http://press.sonymusic.com/2009/06/26/sony-comments-on-the-passing-of-michael-jackson http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1614815/20090626/jackson_michael.jhtml http://edition.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Music/03/05/uk.jackson.comeback/ http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/06/26/2609049.htm 2) http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/Story?id=8050704&page=1 3) h ttp://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/WinterConcert/wireStory?id=7075284 4) h ttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/06/entertainment/michaeljackson/main5137816.shtml 5) http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/06/entertainment/main3461884.shtml 6) http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1614815/20090626/jackson_michael.jhtml 7)http://cbs2.com/entertainment/michael.jackson.hospitalized.2.1059895.html http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/26/arts/music/26jackson.html?_r=1 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/25/AR2009062503127.html http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/wpix-michael-jackson-heart-attack,0,6959872.story http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29531056/ http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Showbiz-News/Michael-Jackson-Memorial-Service---In-Numbers/Article/200907115331455 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8121749.stm 14) http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/f27ec8db-af05-4f36-916e-3d57f91ecf5e etc —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.3.234.167 (talk) 23:44, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Lambert straw poll on including/removing "Order #" and "Results" columns from the performances section

Hi, this may seem rather trivial but I'm trying to gauge community consensus on including or removing "Order #" and "Results" columns from the performances section on the Adam Lambert article which you have been in some way recently involved. The poll is here. Your time is appreciated. -- Banjeboi 21:36, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

what the hell i didnt even touch the Adam Lambert article --Mjlouisdbz14 (talk) 18:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I messaged the editors of the last 100 or so edits on both the article and talkpage. If you'd like to weigh in fine, no worries if you're not that interested. -- Banjeboi 01:03, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

August 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page User talk:Harout72 has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Chevy Impala 2009 00:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page Talk:List of best-selling music artists. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Chevy Impala 2009 00:37, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DID YOU EVEN READ WHAT I SAID??????????, I GAVE A SOURCE TO PROVE MJ SOLD 750 MILLION NOT 350 MILLION, OK????? GOD THIS IS STARTIN TO PISS ME OFF--Mjlouisdbz14 (talk) 00:41, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

please could you change michael jackson sales they don't seem right it cant be 350 all these sources say he has sold 750 million his offical website and sony records have also said this they can not be lying —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.3.234.167 (talk) 00:59, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i tried to mate but im rubish at editing and now i cant edit 4 some reason--Mjlouisdbz14 (talk) 01:18, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

could you or someone else complain about Harout72 please —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.3.234.167 (talk) 01:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

beaucse he claims that cnn are right about but in the sources below it says he has sold 750 million thats 2 cnn soruces agianst 1 of your other cnn source you have provided

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Music/06/26/michael.jackson.album.sales/
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Music/03/05/uk.jackson.comeback/index.html

also if he work this hard on michael jackson sales why dont he work this hard with the beatles, elvis or any other best selling artists —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.3.234.167 (talk) 02:06, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:List of best-selling music artists

Re. Talk:List of best-selling music artists

When you add comments on a talk page, please do so at the end of the page, not the beginning, as otherwise it messes up all the formatting.

I've moved your comment to Talk:List_of_best-selling_music_artists#Michael_Jackson here.

Thanks, Chzz ► 03:42, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:List of best-selling music artists, you will be blocked from editing. Your comments have been noted, and we will work towards a consensus. Repeating your comments, shouting IN CAPITALS and posting in the wrong place will not help anything. Stop it. Chzz ► 04:19, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You need to stop harassing other people by putting those links in User talk pages and the article talk page. Doing that will get you nowhere and may get you blocked for disruptive editing. Momo san ^Gespräch 04:22, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of one week in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for This edit shows that you have'nt learnt the lesson from your block in June that editors should be civil to each other.. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. Rodhull andemu 14:01, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

haha now what are you gonna do, i was correcting you guys ok michael has sold 750 million ok you stupid idiots get it into your stupid heads--Mjlouisdbz14 (talk) 14:31, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am now going to protect this page for the duration of your block on the basis of the continued incivility. Please see this for your options in requesting an unblock. Rodhull andemu 14:40, 13 August 2009 (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).

Mjlouisdbz14 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i am not this user Johnali123, ok so please unblock me or leave it at the duration Rodhullandemu left me at, and i sujest that you make sure someone is a sock puppet before you block them, thank you. ;)

Decline reason:

No real reason given for unblock. -- Daniel Case (talk) 04:16, 20 August 2009 (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.

unblock me so i can talk on my talk page--79.75.152.151 (talk) 01:28, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

just unblock me i an not Johnali123 ok soo i request to be unblocked please--Mjlouisdbz14 (talk) 05:45, 20 August 2009 (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).

Mjlouisdbz14 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i was originaly gonna have a week being blocked but then i was acused of being a sock puppet of Johnali123 which im not and then got blocked perminatly which is unfair i am not this user now please unblock me now

Decline reason:

The investigation (seen here seems to conclude that you are the same user. If you aren't, you need to come up with some pretty good evidence that you aren't, rather than just saying that you aren't. – B.hotep •talk• 11:34, 22 August 2009 (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 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).

Mjlouisdbz14 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I can understand why you accused me, there are all fans of Michael Jackson and we mess with that best lellng artist article, but they dont leave there signatures, I do and one of the sock puppets comented on my talk page, ive teamed up with him to try and edit the best-selling music artists page but as much proof and source we gave they didnt belive us, but i am not this user, give me a chance please

Decline reason:

This block seems valid. What is more it has received plenty of review, please stop repeatedly posting the unblock template. Chillum 17:02, 22 August 2009 (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.