User talk:Nintenchris5963

April 2017

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, 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. —Farix (t | c) 10:32, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Mikagura School Suite. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. —Farix (t | c) 10:06, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making disruptive edits, as you did at Dream Eater Merry.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. —Farix (t | c) 10:36, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Dream Eater Merry. —Farix (t | c) 10:01, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 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 ~~~~}}. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:22, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Angel Beats!

Yuri is not officially called a "protagonist" in reliable sources, so please do not do edits like this calling her one.--十八 03:01, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Golden Time (novel series)‎. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. --十八 23:53, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Nintenchris5963 making threats. —Farix (t | c) 18:40, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

June 2017

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making threats against another editor. 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 ~~~~}}. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:54, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why I'm threatening TheFarix?

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).

Nintenchris5963 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The reason why I'm threatening TheFarix is because of the last sentence he said "Oh, and editing the Touhou Wiki to support your claims is a hilarious act of vandalism." really offended me, and I don't tolerate him for saying that to me. Because of what he said to me, I ended up saying a harmful sentence on his talk page, and I couldn't control myself from doing so. TheFarix, if you're reading this, I'm terribly sorry for saying the most harmful sentence at you, but please don't say something that would really offend me. I'm not mad because of me disliking boys as main protagonists or me wanting what I prefer. I'm mad because of what you said about me editing the Touhou Wiki. Nintenchris5963 (talk) 17:50, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

That's a very clear justification for leaving your block in place. At some point in the future, if you think you'd be able to control yourself in a similar situation, you are welcome to come back and request an unblock under the terms of WP:SO. You'll need to wait at least six months, though, or as long as it takes for you to learn sufficient control. Yamla (talk) 18:48, 6 June 2017 (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.

And seeing this edit here: [1], that six months now ends 2/1/18. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:30, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Why I'm threatening TheFarix?

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).

Nintenchris5963 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The reason why I'm threatening TheFarix is because of the last sentence he said "Oh, and editing the Touhou Wiki to support your claims is a hilarious act of vandalism." really offended me, and I don't tolerate him for saying that to me. Because of what he said to me, I ended up saying a harmful sentence on his talk page, and I couldn't control myself from doing so. TheFarix, if you're reading this, I'm terribly sorry for saying the most harmful sentence at you, but please don't say something that would really offend me. I'm not mad because of me disliking boys as main protagonists or me wanting what I prefer. I'm mad because of what you said about me editing the Touhou Wiki. Nintenchris5963 (talk) 20:44, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I've waited for 8 months instead because I was evading blocks in the first 2 months as RickinBaltimore mentioned. So yeah, that was my fault.

Decline reason:

The request here is virtually identical to the one made back in June - which was declined, entirely correctly. What on earth make you think we're going to accept the same reasoning now? Yunshui ^雲 _水 14:12, 7 February 2018 (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.

You need to convince us that you absolutely can control yourself in the future. You seem to be trying to convince us that you cannot control yourself and so should be left blocked. --Yamla (talk) 20:51, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Waited for 6 + 2 = 8 months has passed.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Nintenchris5963 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have waited for 8 months instead because I was evading blocks in the first 2 months as RickinBaltimore mentioned. It was my mistake for not reading the WP:SO page and force myself to edit Wikipedia anyway. I also blame myself for threatening TheFarix just because he said something offensive to me. From now on, I will promise that I will control myself in the future and will not threaten anymore users. I will also promise that I will not edit-war anymore just because my edits always have been reverted. I will start using talk pages if have something to discuss or something to complain (not in the mean way). Nintenchris5963 (talk) 09:27, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

I am unblocking you to give you another chance, in the hope that you can avoid making the same kind of mistake again. See also my comments below. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 21:26, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming that you have in fact completed the standard offer without a single attempt at evading your block for six months (I'll obviously want a checkuser to verify and give me a thumbs-up), I'm not opposed to unblocking you under the guideline. Boing! said Zebedee will also need to respond and give his blessing before I consider it. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:35, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CU results did not reveal any socking. RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:53, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am a believer in giving editors another chance in situations such as this, so am willing to unblock you. Normally, like Oshwah, I would wait for the blocking administrator, User:Boing! said Zebedee, to express an opinion, but he is away from Wikipedia for a while, so it might be a very long wait, and he has also said that while he is away he is happy for any administrator to reverse his actions without consulting him, so I shall go ahead and unblock you. Please do be careful about what you say in future, as I hope you won't be blocked again. (Also if you were to be blocked again for the same reason, the likelihood of your then being unblocked would be much lower than this time.) The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 21:23, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Golden Time (novel series), 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. —Farix (t | c) 17:40, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use styles that are unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Aria the Scarlet Ammo. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 14:23, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Talk:Monthly Girls' Nozaki-kun. 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.

Points to note:

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 and 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. EvergreenFir (talk) 13:57, 23 June 2018 (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/Nintenchris5963, 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.

—Farix (t | c) 00:27, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've been mimicked. That user is trying to get me blocked again. But I hate to admit, but I do agree with him, though. Nintenchris5963 (talk) 01:48, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nintenchris5963. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Bbb23 (talk) 12:43, 28 June 2018 (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).

Nintenchris5963 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm telling you the truth. I really am mimicked. Because the only user who would rearrange character orders is none other than me and me only. I only allow him to edit Monthly Girls' Nozaki-kun, but I don't remember allowing him to rearrange characters on other pages because only I do that. I suggest having that user to be blocked or have his account be deleted instead of me. Nintenchris5963 (talk) 06:17, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You are lying. The account Eggman2000 is technically identical to yours - you are using the same computer to edit from both accounts. Your talkpage access has been revoked; good faith only extends so far, and we are not obligated to tolerate your mendacity indefinitely. Yunshui ^雲 _水 08:36, 29 June 2018 (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.