User talk:Achmednut321

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Achmednut321, 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:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

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! Aboutmovies (talk) 05:26, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2011

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User talk:71.244.170.111. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Just because the IP is a vandal doesn't mean you can attack them like you did JDDJS (talk) 23:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits on List of Mad episodes

Okay, I'm am convinced that you are the IP 98.165.140.193. So I'm going to tell you again, don't add anything pertaining to a second season unless you have reliable sources to back the claims. This goes double for trying to use sources that don't verify the claims. Heed my words. Thank you. Sarujo (talk) 23:38, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I have stated before, things like I heard/saw it somewhere and it's out there is not a reliable source. We don't go by word of mouth. The source currently in use only verifies that Mad is still within it's first season. Even if we were to take into consideration things like I heard/saw it somewhere and it's out there, it would only prove that Cartoon Network is marketing the episodes as a new season. Just because a network a Network bill a new wave of episodes as a new season, doesn't mean that it truly is. There have been instances where a network advertised a new season for a show and the show was later revealed to still be in it's previous season. For example, South Park. Sarujo (talk) 11:32, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fine then, if you are or are not 98.165.140.193, then an evaluation will prove it. So if you are lying to me right now, I would suggest coming clean. Otherwise you will be in far more trouble. Sarujo (talk) 11:54, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've already stated that TV.com to not be a reliable source. The fact that you bring this up and make a comment that I'll be sorry come April, only convinces me more that you truly are 98.165.140.193. Like said on that other talk page, you are skating on thin ice. Sarujo (talk) 12:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, if you are not them, then an evaluation will prove it. I will admit I was wrong and you can rest at ease. Sarujo (talk) 12:05, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The content on that site is user generated (meaning that anyone can edit), with very little editorial control and very little fact checking. Sarujo (talk) 12:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Still you need reliable sources. Promos can't really be used as sources themselves - I've tried. In regards to Regular Show other stuff exists is not a valid argument. Just because that's show's episode list mentions a second season is not a justification for adding a claim of a new season. I have already stated that there is a difference in a television season and a production season. Promos and the such only suggest that the Network is only marketing the episodes as such. The only way at this point, and I mean the only way to verify a new season is if we had the production code numbers from a reliable source. Plus, I saw that episode when it broadcasted as well, and the bug in the corner only read new episode. Sarujo (talk) 12:45, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's merely a sourcing issue. Hopefully they will fix it, and we make the adjustment. Sarujo (talk) 12:59, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've told this multiple times already - don't add information without reliable sources to back the claims. If you think biding your time will make the edit acceptable, then your sadly mistaken. Sarujo (talk) 07:50, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm tire of talking to you. If you keep trying to add that information, I will be forced to take this to the admins. Consider this your only warning. Sarujo (talk) 06:55, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've told you what needs to happen here, and you have failed to heed my advice. No sources, no add. Simple. Sarujo (talk) 07:22, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. 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. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address 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) 11:58, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for attempting to harass other users. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Closedmouth (talk) 08:02, 22 February 2011 (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).

Achmednut321 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I just tried to prove my point. We argued over the name spelling for an episode even though the official episode proved my point. Also, Cartoon Network and the official MAD magazine confirmed the MAD series was on Season 2 and when I tried to edit it, he kept changing it. So please unblock me, he deserves to be the one having this block.Achmednut321 (talk) 08:15, 22 February 2011 (UTC)Achmednut321

Decline reason:

That does not explain your terrible behavior here; not to mention your blatant harassment here, here. Frankly, I don't think you are interested in explaining why you were harassing Sarujo, which was the reason behind your block. Nothing excuses wantonly harassing others. –MuZemike 09:11, 22 February 2011 (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.

Note to Closedmouth

Closedmouth, since you can't read this since you blocked me. I want to tell you the truth and not whatever crap Sarujo told you.

1) MAD was officially on Season 2 and MAD Magazine confirmed it and that it started in February 2) He kept denying it. 3) I took it upon myself to edit it. 4) He kept change it back. 5) We got in a pretty heated debate. 6) We argued over an episodes name although the OFFICIAL episode confirmed my guess. 7) He STILL edited it every time I changed it.

So please unblock me HE'S the one who deserves to be blocked. Now you know the truth have a nice day

And that excuses this how, exactly? --Closedmouth (talk) 08:45, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive me if I get mad sometimes everyone does and you do too.

Well..

i want to tell you guys the real truth about me and the Wikipedia editor known as Sarujo. Well I edited the MAD page and added the truth. (Snott, So You Think You Can Train Your Dragon How to Dance, and that MAD is on Season 2.) But then after I gave him good references he still wouldn't believe me and now I got blocked that's just wrong I don't deserve this block and I admit I was doing bad things but not worthy enough to get a block. I mean, the only pages I edited besides MAD are Regular Show and I add the truth ask anyone,23:42, 22 February 2011 (UTC)Achmednut321

March 2011

I can see your still you still have learned anything after a block. I would highly suggest that review the the guidelines here or else stronger measures may be taken against you. Don't add information without sources. Sarujo (talk) 08:39, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Forums are not reliable sources. Sarujo (talk) 23:29, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not when you haven't provided any definitive proof of such. I told you what was needed for the article and you have done nothing to help out. All that you have done is made unverified claims. Sarujo (talk) 23:36, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and one more thing, stop creating new sections for every message you send. You're talking about the same subject. So there no need of abundance gross of section of the same thing. Sarujo (talk) 23:43, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been told about that using their scheduling page, as it is unreliable. It doesn't even confirm episode 18 or a second season. Plus you have removed a verifying reliable source. This constitutes a disruptive behavior and will not be tolerated. If you want to continue editing, I'd suggest that show some professionalism and knock of the funny business. Otherwise you will be brought before the admins again. Consider this your only warning. Sarujo (talk) 01:00, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. 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. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address 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) 23:32, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011

This is your last warning; the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Regular Show, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 00:36, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. 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. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address 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) 22:27, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I just need to tell you something.

An admin banned Mordecai4444 and Mordecai3333 (but so far, he spared Mordecai2222). Just letting you know that your friend hasn't been banned from this site completely.--King-9 (talk) 05:59, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you and Mordecai all right now?--King-9 (talk) 15:37, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, he's just mad.

Good article reassessment for The Problem Solverz

The Problem Solverz has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Spinixster (chat!) 12:43, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]