User talk:Sidetosice

July 2018

Hello, I'm SummerPhDv2.0. I noticed that you made one or more changes to an article, Yours Truly (Ariana Grande album), 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. SummerPhD^v2.0 03:43, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Lati K

The article Lati K has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. reddogsix (talk) 00:28, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

October 2018

Please remember to update accessdates when updating peaks on song and album articles, otherwise you are misleading editors as to when you accessed a new peak, and it's even less helpful than it would ordinarily be if it hasn't been updated. Thanks. Ss112 10:19, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits

I don't mean to seem humorless, but if you want to write things like this, go on one of your personal social media accounts like Twitter or something and rave about artists there. I'm partial to a humorous edit summary here and there, but not to actually save edits where you write purely as a fan and aren't improving the article. Ss112 11:00, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018

Thank you for your contributions. One of your recent contributions has been reverted or removed, because it contains speculative or unconfirmed information about a future event. Please only add material about future events if it is verifiable, based on a reliable source. Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:17, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Breathin, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. This is now the second week in a row you have seen fit to update a Billboard Hot 100 peak without providing a source for it—the archive does not update until hours after the Hot 100 is first announced, so you need to cite an additional source for it. Ss112 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Lati K

Hello, Sidetosice,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Lati K should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lati K .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks,

Flooded with them hundreds 10:56, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018

Please stop your disruptive editing. Please stop your disruptive editing If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, as you did at Talk:Lady Gaga, you may Please stop your disruptive editing blocked from editing. This is Please stop your disruptive editing allowed in Wikipedia and not tolerated. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 21:05, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:Sidetosice. This is flatly unacceptable. You are exactly one disruptive edit from being blocked. Ad Orientem (talk) 21:31, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

that is my OWN talk page, what are you on about? And I deleted that almost immediately. You are quite late •Sidetosice (talk) 21:41, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

You need to read WP:UP. There are community guidelines as to what is and is not allowed on a user page. Seriously. If you don't understand that what you posted in not acceptable, your time here is likely to be short. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:50, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Lati K. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message from a bot about this edit, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:19, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Soft pop (talk) 12:39, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to My Everything (Ariana Grande album), without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Aoi (青い) (talk) 06:50, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:59.138.55.69

User:59.138.55.69, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:59.138.55.69 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:59.138.55.69 during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Aoi (青い) (talk) 06:58, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

December 2018

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• 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, as you did at Wikipedia:Sandbox, you may be blocked from editing. funplussmart (talk) 00:30, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

excuse me Sidetosice (talk) 00:31, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User redirecting pages for no apparent reason, abusing sandbox. funplussmart (talk) 00:53, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

You created that whole discussion, nobody else is “discussing” it except you.. /: Sidetosice (talk) 00:57, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Bot?

You say you're "testing a bot" [1]. Please be aware that bots require prior approval and must be operated separately. See WP:BOTPOL. Operating an unapproved bot can get you blocked. Acroterion (talk) 02:35, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

I think it’s all broken so I’ll refrain from using it, or get it fixed and approved Sidetosice (talk) 02:37, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps you can explain why you and your unapproved bot made edits identical to those made by the account I just blocked: B0T5L4YR (talk · contribs)? Acroterion (talk) 02:40, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

O I’m not entirely sure.. I think it copy and pasted whatever that person sent in and just went crazy on me. I wanted to test in the sandbox but idk Sidetosice (talk) 02:42, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

That person claimed to be operating a bot too... If you do anything like that again you can expect to be blocked. Stop messing around with the encyclopedia - nthere are plenty of other ways to play with mediawiki software. You're very close to being blocked for messing with bots and abusing multiple accounts. Acroterion (talk) 02:45, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

What, that isn’t my account though! Alright I wasn’t using a bot, I actually just copy and pasted what that person sent in for fun but I’m not them! I’m sorry Sidetosice (talk) 16:07, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

I still don’t understand why you decided to block me AFTER pasting some things on my talk page like.. yes I do understand, a number of the things I did were wrong but, I was put on block AFTER I explained that I was not that user, did not “abuse multiple accounts”, did not use a bot, and did not actually intend to disrupt the article. Then you later claimed that I was blocked for ALL of my disruptions since May, which ranged from sourcing to redirecting pages inappropriately, so why wasn’t I blocked prior? :\ questions Sidetosice (talk) 06:05, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

December 2018

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to God Is a Woman. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. OhKayeSierra (talk) 06:35, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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 ~~~~}}.  Acroterion (talk) 17:43, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I know I’ve made a lot of dumb edits and put disruptive things on my talk page and around necessary articles on Wiki but I’m really sorry, I love spending my time on here to just edit music articles and update stuff, etc. I only did those edits because I was just either playing around or finding something “new” to mess with, but it wasn’t intended to personally harm anybody purposely. I apologize and I won’t ruin any pages including my own with random icons, language, or add stuff that will disrupt anybody again. Sidetosice (talk) 19:02, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. SQL^{Query me!} 05:14, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

---

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're not hurting anyone (apart from yourself), just the encyclopedia. There are a number of warnings on this talkpage concerning sourcing, avoidance of original research, speculation, redirecting things inappropriately ... The list goes on, a remarkable number for someone who's only been editing since May. . Any useful unblock request must substantively address these problems. Acroterion (talk) 03:32, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

I know but the sourcing and original research are common mistakes some people do, plus with the more editing I’ve done, I learned how to use sourcing templates and try not to add my own research. I just want to contribute more to articles and add/fix up small details in others. As for the redirecting and adding unnecessary things, that’s my mistake and I wholeheartedly knew/know it was wrong. Sidetosice (talk) 15:50, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

What’s the point of leaving messages on my talk page and when I reply back to it, there’s no form of communication like.. oh and by the way, although I have been editing since early May, the majority, if not dominating number of valid and good edits I’ve made completely overshadows the disruptive ones; I don’t have just 50, 100 or even 300 edits. A few missing sourcing along with the one original research warnings I’ve received are quite old or a bit of a heads up. All of those edits were later redone with a source, you know, always assume good faith right? I just think labeling and treating me as if I made this account for the sole purpose to ruin the encyclopedia is wrong. I 100% understand know what I did and how it was wrong, and I will not do anything like that again, I just want to edit again. Also, me and User:B0T5L4YR also are not connected. I wish you’d understand this, already two of my unblock requests are decline because the administrators believe I run that account and think I’m only here to ruin articles. Sidetosice (talk) 05:59, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I understand that I was blocked for: spamming with unnecessary text/icons, redirecting pages that didn’t need to be redirected, messing up my user talk page and more. I wholeheartedly understand and know the reasons for my block, and I respectfully request to be unblocked and I won’t continue to do edits maliciously on Wikipedia. I will drop all disruptive editing and only contribute positively to any articles.

Decline reason:

Actually, you're wasting our time. It's my understanding that you attend an educational institution. You and your friends at school should know that even though you're wasting less of our time than your own, the time you're taking up is time that could've been spent writing articles or finding sources or improving this encyclopedia. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 08:55, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

I’m confused, what does my education or whether I have friends or not have to do with anything here..? Sidetosice (talk) 13:02, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

---

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.

Please explain with specificity any connection you have with User:B0T5L4YR. Do you control the account? Do you know who does, or have a hunch? Why did you choose to copy that user's edits?

I already explained this to the other editor who accused me of this, no I do not control it nor do I don’t know them. If you believe me and my friends are going to be on Wikipedia copy and pasting nonsense into the sandbox to actually disrupt then that’s incorrect. The only reason and explanation for why I did that is, as I said, because I was bored and thought it was funny. I’m aware it wasn’t. If you think that’s one of my sockpuppets, try and find the location of the account creations, there’s no connections! Sidetosice (talk) 13:02, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Please also explain why the Wikipedia community should believe that you will be a net positive for Wikipedia. In other words, we've seen a lot of disruption from this account and not a lot of demonstrated potential for positive contribution. Why should we believe that unblocking you will make the encyclopedia better?

I think your best bet will be to answer these questions, and then wait at least six months. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 08:51, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

I do understand this but I have made over 700 edits or so, out of those, not many are actual vandalism or disruptive things. Maybe a small fraction but after all this I’m 100% sure not to do anything like this again. If that was the case, my editing number wouldn’t be so high. I understand what I’ve done was wrong and some things like copy and pasting another persons vandalism might’ve not been the smartest choice, I didn’t do it everyday though. I don’t know if unblocking me will “better” the encyclopedia as a whole, but I know I won’t do something like this ever again. This isn’t meant to sound in a rude tone by the way. Sidetosice (talk) 16:00, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Are you guys just going to ignore me and make me wait here for the next six months? And I still have no clue why my education or friends were bought up into this. Sidetosice (talk) 05:59, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

July 2019

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Hey well it’s been about 7-8 months since I have last got on this, I just wanted to make an update sorta. I do understand what I did several months ago was wrong and acknowledge my behavior one way or another was disruptive even if I did contribute, senseless behavior like pasting random characters and badges everywhere isn’t what Wikipedia is about. I’ve took a break and would like to come back as an editor and person who is willing to contribute instead of someone who will being the community down. I’m unsure if I have to explain what and why I did what I did last year but I just want whoever is reading this to understand I won’t do it again and can see why I got the block I deserved. I apologize for my edits a long time ago and hope you can forgive me for trolling on this account which I did appreciate a lot, because I enjoy editing music articles and extending them a lot. I know trolling was not the best idea but my intentions weren’t to cause harm at all, believe me. —— Also, by the way, I know this might have been wrong of me (?), I don’t want you to think I just waited half a year to come back and waste more time, and I’m not trying to look for my other account to get blocked because I seriously have treated my other account very nicely. I have made contributions using my other personal Wiki account GogoGrande, but on a different device. I don’t want to get banned on there as well because I evaded my block on this account, I just do enjoy editing articles honestly. Thanks so much Sidetosice (talk) 23:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Thanks for letting us know. I will go and block that account now, as a blatant violation of WP:EVADE and WP:SOCK, and revert any contributions I find. You are blocked, have clearly demonstrated you cannot be trusted, and many of your contributions with your other account would have been inappropriate even had you not been blocked here. Remember, blocks apply to the person, not the account. Yamla (talk) 00:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

---

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.

How else am I supposed to edit on Wikipedia? I got blocked because of a mistake I made 8 months ago and made a new account where I could make edits and not be doing the same mistakes I did before. Seems unfair to block my other account and completely revert everything I made, especially since you wouldn’t have known about this if I didn’t mention it. I felt it was appropriate to say I ran a second account so you could notice I’ve made plenty of contributions, not to show off the “inappropriate edits” I have.. which are none. I’ve done nothing wrong on my other account. Sidetosice (talk) 00:36, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

"How else am I supposed to edit on Wikipedia" You aren't. That's the whole point. You are blocked, you aren't welcome or permitted to make any edits while blocked. --Yamla (talk) 11:53, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Block evasion

User has admitted to block evasion between December, 2018 and July, 2019. --Yamla (talk) 00:14, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Seems a bit unfair to re-block me again and revert ALL of the edits I made (which were constructive and expanding on articles) just because I was on another account. I admitted I made a new page but my intentions weren’t to evade a block and cause destruction, I didn’t even do anything wrong on my other account? You wouldn’t even have known about said account if I had not mentioned it..? Sidetosice (talk) 00:31, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

"I didn’t even do anything wrong on my other account" You are forgetting that every single edit violated WP:EVADE and WP:SOCK. --Yamla (talk) 11:53, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

I’ve made multiple edits on multiple accounts including Arivgao as well. You certainly will not be able to block all of them...? Sidetosice (talk) 13:41, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

I’m not telling you my other accounts just so you can block them all Sidetosice (talk) 13:55, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Sidetosice, you don't have to pretend to be someone else. This is abusive. 115.164.205.202 (talk) 19:32, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

TPA revoked

Due to your continued vandalism, I have revoked your talk page access. This leaves you with WP:UTRS. --Yamla (talk) 14:02, 18 July 2019 (UTC)