User talk:Unknown artist

December 2017

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2017. 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. !dave 13:09, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Unknown_artist reported by User:Arthur Rubin (Result: ). Thank you. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 08:45, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please can you unblock me now Unknown artist (talk) 16:58, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Air France Flight 447. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block.

There is a note in the article, which you should read:  Dr. K. 17:21, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at 2017

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}.

The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 01:16, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok it's been more than 31 hours now. Please unblock me. I just don't think it's fair to block someone who's still getting use to the systems and rules on this site. Unknown artist (talk) 17:35, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Hello, Unknown artist, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking oder or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! – S. Rich (talk) 11:08, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Einführung Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Department directory Help directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our new user help forum, the Teahouse The Help Desk, for more advanced questions Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Proposed deletion of Alfie Scopp

Hello, Unknown artist. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Alfie Scopp, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Alfie Scopp to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.

Thanks,

‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 16:57, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Alfie Scopp

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 Alfie Scopp 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 real person or group of people, but it does not credibly 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 deleted 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. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk • contribs) 17:31, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted edit

Hello! Could you please elaborate a bit on the reason of your edit, effectively reverting my previous edit? I don't think an empty "Deaths" section in 2018 is useful to any reader, while it may be slightly upsetting to some readers (say, a person whose relative or friend is terminally ill or something). --Yury Bulka (talk) 16:15, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources needed for Days of the Year pages

You're probably not aware but Days of the Year pages are no longer exempt from WP:V and direct sources are required for additions. For details see the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. The article about the person you added to January 28 did not have any source to back up your addition has been reverted. Please do not restore it without providing a direct reliable source. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 18:44, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ted Phillips (footballer)

Could you please provide a source for the date of his death? Thanks, Number 5 7 14:14, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Following certain ‘rules’

Hello. You appear to be constantly removing people from the 2018 page because they have less than 9 languages on Wikipedia. I wanted to let you know that that rule has been mooted for months, and any editing you remove due to the reasoning of less than 9 languages will be considered as potential edit warring. Please reconsider your constant edits so that you no longer believe in certain guidelines you thought out to be. Thank you. JoeyRuss (talk) 23:42, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Try all you want I will continue until it stops, you can stay out of it. Unknown artist (talk) 23:42, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to 2018, did not appear constructive and has 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 the 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. House1090 (talk) 04:40, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have undone a complaint about yourself at the edit warring noticeboard. Can you explain why you shouldn't be blocked for disrupting Wikipedia? Back in December you were blocked 31 hours for edit warring at 2017, and you don't appear to listen to advice. "Try all you want I will continue until it stops, you can stay out of it." Promising to edit war is not a good strategy if you want to continue editing Wikipedia. EdJohnston (talk) 17:47, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All I'm trying to do is stop people who aren't worldly known from going on a page that as far as I can remember has a rule that says it only accepts people with their article in 9 or more languages. It's the users adding them that are putting me at risk. If you want to prove to me that I'm stupid then send me a link to the rule page. Unkown artist (talk) 18:08, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're not allowed to keep reverting, whether or not there is a rule. If you will agree to stop (until you get a talk page consensus in your favor) you may be able to avoid a block. EdJohnston (talk) 18:24, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm telling the honest truth. I did see a 9 languages rule. Unknown artist (talk) 18:54, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That guideline was disregarded months ago. The rule is now anyone with major significance worldwide, despite the amount of languages they had on Wikipedia, can be included. Please keep this in mind for future edits. JoeyRuss (talk) 22:14, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe someone shouldn’t be included, please use the talk page for future instances so this dispute doesn’t happen again. JoeyRuss (talk) 22:20, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the 4 day ban asshole. So this is what I get for being honest about something I really did see. Unknown artist (talk) 22:32, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you really did see it, can you link to it? EdJohnston (talk) 23:22, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I really did see it, but it was a while ago and I've forgotten how to get to it. Unknown artist (talk) 23:54, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at 2018; continuation of the previous problem

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 4 days for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}.

Per a complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. If you don't intend to follow Wikipedia policy regarding consensus, you may not belong here. EdJohnston (talk) 22:02, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure it's been 4 days now. Please unblock me. Unknown artist (talk) 00:05, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The block has expired. —C.Fred (talk) 00:50, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why hasn't my block ended when whoever did it said it ended at 22:04 last night. Unknown artist (talk) 07:32, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018

Please explain your contributions using a descriptive edit summary. Changing information on Wikipedia (such as numbers and dates) without explanation may be confused with vandalism. Thank you.★Trekker (talk) 11:40, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will gladly oblige. Unknown artist (talk) 17:07, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Scott Glenn. Thank you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:27, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just trying to be helpful. Unknown artist (talk) 22:02, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at List of the oldest living state leaders. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 22:35, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What did I do to that made you think I vandalised a page. I would never edit a page with the intention of vandalism. All I did was put the ages up to date. Unknown artist (talk) 22:50, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Summarily removing items from year articles without reason

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! The Rambling Man (talk) 12:50, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I keep forgetting. Unknown artist (talk) 12:55, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You can change your settings to remind you to add one each time you press the Publish button. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:01, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2018. 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. –Davey2010^Talk 16:29, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at 2018 shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. –Davey2010^Talk 16:29, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sources needed for Days of the Year pages

You're probably not aware of this change, but Days of the Year pages are no longer exempt from WP:V and direct sources are required for additions. For details see the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. I've gone ahead and added a source to back up your recent addition to February 2. Please try to find sources for additions to these pages as the burden to provide them is on the editor who adds or restores material to these pages. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 23:23, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dancing on Ice Week 5

@Unknown artist: For the Week 5 save me skates It should say Cheryl & Daniel not Cheryl & Dan as on the scoring chart, average chart and live show details it says Cheryl & Daniel2A02:C7D:8AA4:5600:8DA1:92A7:17F:C7EB (talk) 21:30, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't do that edit Unknown artist (talk) 21:42, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you change it anyway.2A02:C7D:8AA4:5600:8DA1:92A7:17F:C7EB (talk) 22:04, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fine Unknown artist (talk) 22:33, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dancing on Ice Week 4

@Unknown artist: On the Leaderboard it should be like this ‘=1st’ not ‘1st=‘2A02:C7D:8AA4:5600:8DA1:92A7:17F:C7EB (talk) 12:57, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deaths in 2018

Hello. Please note that new days are not to be added until the LINT time has passed midnight on said day. Thank you. --Marbe166 (talk) 08:58, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Deaths in 2018, you may be blocked from editing. Do not add the new day before the LINT time passes midnight! --Marbe166 (talk) 10:00, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did adding Betsy Jochum's unsupported date of birth to February 8. WP:DOB and WP:BLP are taken seriously. Toddst1 (talk) 15:05, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked yet again

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for continuing same behavior as led to prior blocks. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Jayron 32 15:42, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have blocked this account for 1 month because it doesn't seem like you've learned from the prior blocks. Let me explain this concisely, for the last time. When you add new information to an article (such as someone's birthdate), you are required to properly cite the reliable source where that information came from. People have been trying to explain that to you for months. If you want to be unblocked early, you're going to have to demonstrate knowledge of Wikipedia policy here, and convince us you're going to abide by it going forward. Also, patience is running out with this. Consider this 1 month block your last chance. The next time you are blocked, it will be an indefinite block. Good day. --Jayron 32 15:42, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Can you point me to where this user added a birthdate to an article without a reference in the last few days? The Rambling Man (talk) 15:47, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is this Jayron32 a pathetic troll who blocked me for no reason at all. I haven't done anything to deserve this. Unknown artist (talk) 15:50, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that calling me names is a useful way forward here. Like I said above, explain why you need to be unblocked, and what you are going to do to change your behavior going forward, and you'll be unblocked. If you want to call me names, well, have fun with that. I doubt that will result in your desired outcome. --Jayron 32 15:57, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't block me. All I'm trying to do is expanding certain pages and adding content I feel works better. Plus I don't know how to do references so it's kind of unfair to block me because I can't do something. Unknown artist (talk) 16:10, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If Jayron32 unblocks you, will you work with me every time you want to add something for the next few days so we can add a reference with it, I can help with the technical aspects. P.S. Worth an apology to Jayron either way for calling him a troll. He's not that hirsute. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:12, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jayron32 I'm sorry for the troll comment, I tend to lose it when I feel something undeserved happens to me. Unknown artist (talk) 16:15, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So do you accept the offer of assistance with referencing which might help you get unblocked? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:17, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If someone dies and I need someone to provide a reference to a news article reporting the death and if I add what you see as poorly sourced content, then yes. Unknown artist (talk) 16:22, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's all we want. Work with us and we'll be helpful. Anyways, I have unblocked this account. Vaya con dios. --Jayron 32 16:23, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, although currently you would be editing within house style to not reference additions to the 2018 article. Other articles need inline referencing, and this works the other way round, I'm not going to monitor your edits, but if you need my help adding a reference, you ask me. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:43, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Birth Date and Age Template

Hi Unknown artist. Please note that the birth date and age template is used only for living people, not those in the "possibly living" category because, if we do not know whether or not they are alive, we cannot claim that they are a certain age, per Wikipedia's policies on verifiability. Thanks. Canadian Paul 12:08, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Iran Aseman Airlines Flight 3704

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Iran Aseman Airlines Flight 3704. --WikiHannibal (talk) 14:18, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Poison (Alice Cooper song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Heavy metal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 09:08, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

Hello. Some of your recent genre changes have conflicted with our neutral point of view and verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend you seek consensus for certain edits by discussing the matter on the article's talk page. Thank you. 115.164.170.22 (talk) 07:17, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]