User talk:Satsukihuffingtoon40

September 2022

Hi Satsukihuffingtoon40! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor at Asuka Saitō that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you.

Also, our infobox template instructions, and the hidden text you removed, clearly explain that "nationality" isn't used in the infobox unless the nationality is different from what is indicated by birthplace. The infobox already indicates that Saitō's birthplace is in Japan. So, why did you add "nationality" information into the infobox? Indignant Flamingo (talk) 19:39, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An additional question: since our policy WP:NOTDATABASE explains that we don't just add stats and unexplained facts for no good reason to articles, can you explain why you added "height" to the infobox, when that parameter is only used for cases where the height is unusual or relevant to the profession? Or can you point out where in the article her height is discussed? Indignant Flamingo (talk) 19:44, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's relevant because one of her profession is being a model. Satsukihuffingtoon40 (talk) 16:17, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Lisa (rapper), did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 15:13, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Lisa (rapper), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you would like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:25, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2022

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Devon Aoki have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Devon Aoki was changed by Satsukihuffingtoon40 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.855296 on 2022-09-29T08:45:23+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 08:46, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022

Hello, I'm Paper9oll. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, An Yu-jin, 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. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 13:06, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you speak English?

I see that you've been making a lot of infobox changes that do not follow consensus on how to use infoboxes, despite being pointed to the instructions on how to do it properly. Do you speak English? Indignant Flamingo (talk) 20:28, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain namespaces ((Article)) for incompetence, lack of communication.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Drmies (talk) 01:06, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies:Satsukihuffingtoon40 (talk) 16:37, 18 May 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).

Satsukihuffingtoon40 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was unfortunately not really familiar with the "how to properly edit" a page such as a namespace and linking unverified sources and just put what seemed relevant to an article without giving a second thought if it (the content/link)was even from a reliable source & kept on putting my reverted edits back. My bad, I will read & follow the policies in wikipedia to know better. It was not my intention to vandalize the Asuka Saito and Lisa articles. Satsukihuffingtoon40 (talk) 16:36, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Once you have read and understood the relevant policies, but not before, you are free to contest your block. Yamla (talk) 17:10, 18 May 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.

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).

Satsukihuffingtoon40 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Yes I have finished reading the wikipedia policies about a few months back, and am now knowledgeable about it. I will refrain from putting not reliable sources to articles. I apologise for the misunderstanding. Satsukihuffingtoon40 (talk) 04:05, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

We will need more than your word on this. Please demonstrate your understanding by telling us what you did wrong, what you will do differently, and what edits you intend to make. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 08:55, 19 May 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.

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).

Satsukihuffingtoon40 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

as I've mentioned in the previous appeals I linked unreliable sources, without a second thought if the content was from reliable sources (as I didn't recognize(know) what webites with reliable sources were/indication that they were). If I'm adding new info on an article I'll be sure to put relevant ones. I don't have edits in mind as of the moment. Satsukihuffingtoon40 (talk) 11:25, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

If you do not have any edits in mind at the moment, there is no need to lift the block. Come back when you are ready to provide specifics. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 15:32, 19 May 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.

@331dot:Satsukihuffingtoon40 (talk) 11:25, 19 May 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).

Satsukihuffingtoon40 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

is it wrong to request an unblock without making content immediately afterwards? Satsukihuffingtoon40 (talk) 02:57, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline; this is an abusive unblock request. The unblock template is to be used to request an unblock, not to ask questions. And the answer is yes, it's wrong. There's no point lifting your block if you don't intend to edit. Note that you are very, very close to losing talk page access. Any further abuse will almost certainly result in your talk page access being revoked. Yamla (talk) 10:44, 20 May 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.