User talk:Auley

June 2018

Hello, I'm Jim1138. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Donna Air, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Jim1138 (talk) 08:27, 18 June 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 persons, as you did with this edit to Hugh Grosvenor, 7th Duke of Westminster. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 08:27, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unreferenced controversial biographical content to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did with this edit to Pippa Middleton. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 08:31, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Varg Vikernes. 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 ~~~~}}. Laser brain (talk) 18:22, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Posoc

Mira tú que cosa. Es que. Ni que estuviera mal o algo. Sorry, hay que estar atentos al material que sino pa eso no corrijas. Digo. Thenamelessdoll (talk) 19:25, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Kaliopi. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. You have already been blocked for adding questionable content without sources, and if you are blocked again for the same reason the block is likely to be for a longer time. Breaking sticks (talk) 21:36, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

:)

Not doing it again even though I'm alqays right when I change something :))) Thenamelessdoll (talk) 13:46, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing again, this time for a much longer period, because you have continued to add questionable unreferenced content to articles about people. Please stop, or you are likely to be blocked indefinitely. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 01:13, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Haha

For how long Thenamelessdoll (talk) 09:49, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Answe: Well, I just saw this, it's creepy why doesn't it include an ip?

Disambiguation link notification for August 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Daria Werbowy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cork (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) 09:40, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Georgia Groome. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:20, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You seriously need to stop adding unsourced birth dates. Also, please do not cite the IMDb. This is not a reliable source, and it can not be used for citations on Wikipedia. If you continue to add poorly-sourced and unsourced content to biographies of living people, you will certainly be blocked again. It probably won't be a short block, either. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:01, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Behati Prinsloo

Am I blind? [1]. Twitter is not reliable source, I can also create an account and say that my queen turns 40 today. Cynko (talk) 18:58, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Madison Beer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page VMA (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) 09:19, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018

Hello, I'm Denniss. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Dylan Sprouse have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. Denniss (talk) 21:03, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Barbara Palvin. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Denniss (talk) 21:03, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Hello, TheNamelessDoll, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Table of contents / Department directory

The Wikipedia Adventure (a tutorial orienting you with Wikipedia)
The Signpost, our newspaper

Need help?

Questions – a guide on where to ask questions
Cheatsheet – quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes
Wikipedia's 5 pillars – an overview of Wikipedia's foundations

Article wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
The simplified ruleset – a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules
Guide to Wikipedia – a thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia

How you can help:

Contributing to Wikipedia – a guide on how you can help

Community portal – Wikipedia's hub of activity

Additional tips...

Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The or button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills without changing the mainspace, the Sandbox is for you.

TheNamelessDoll, good luck, and have fun. — Newslinger talk 17:34, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Charlize Theron. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. — Newslinger talk 17:40, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I just added content that some unregistered user deleted in the previous edition. TheNamelessDoll (talk) 18:35, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, TheNamelessDoll. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content.

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 ~~~~}}. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:24, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You've been blocked until you can assure us you will stop adding unsourced content to biographies of living people. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:25, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm aware I have done wrong and that I should have added references to every edit I have made. I'm sorry and I promise I won't do it again. TheNamelessDoll (talk) 14:34, 26 November 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).

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

Request reason:

As I said before, I'm aware and sorry for not following Wikipedia's rules about referencing every edit and adding sources. I'm sorry about that and if you give me a chance I promiso it won't happen ever again.

Decline reason:

This does not convince me you understand WP:RS, which you've been violating for months and months. You are welcome to make a new unblock request. Please explain WP:CITE and WP:RS in your own words. Yamla (talk) 14:57, 26 November 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.

Unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

I've read both WP:Cite and Wikipedia:Verifiability and what I understood is that I must add citations/references to every piece of information I add to an article and that the source must reliable. Otherwise the content can be eliminated and I could be blocked again. I aware of this now and I know I haven't done it in the past but I'm willing to do it now TheNamelessDoll (talk) 21:14, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You haven't yet demonstrated that you understand those policies and adequately answered NinjaRobotPirate's question below. You need to do these things before you can be unblocked. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 14:10, 6 December 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.

I think it would help if you explained what makes a source reliable. That would address Yamla's reason for declining your block. For example, is the IMDb a reliable source? What about famousbirthdays.com? What Wikipedia forum would you use to ask if a site is reliable? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:10, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sources are reliable when it can be verified what they talk about is true and it is basically a well-reasoned theory, argument, discussion, etc. based on evidence.

IMDB amd famousbirthdays.com are not examples of reliable sources.

And if I had to ask if a site is reliable I would go to the Teahouse TheNamelessDoll (talk) 07:28, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I could go to the Editor assistance or the Help desk TheNamelessDoll (talk) 07:33, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Sources are reliable when it can be verified what they talk about is true and it is basically a well-reasoned theory, argument, discussion, etc. based on evidence." No, this is not remotely correct. --Yamla (talk) 11:43, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

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).

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

Request reason:

So there's no way I can edit on Wikipedia anymore? I regret adding unsourced information and I understand why I was blocked but there's no room for a second chance?

Decline reason:

It's clear you understand that you need to cite reliable sources, but I'm not convinced that you understand how to do so. In particular, your answer to NinjaRobotPirate's question was not correct and not detailed enough. At a minimum, you need to explain why sources like IMDB and famousbirthdays are not reliable. -- Scott (talk) 05:45, 24 December 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.

TheNamelessDoll (talk) 19:38, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Someone else will review your request, but you may want to answer NinjaRobotPirate's question above. There is also the standard offer process. 331dot (talk) 21:19, 21 December 2018 (UTC)r[reply]

Sources like IMDB and famousbirthdays are not reliable because anyone can edit those pages without adding references. Auley (talk) 19:09, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the info in those pages is user-generated. Auley (talk) 19:14, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:331dot, do I have to wait six months in order to be eligible for the standard offer? Auley (talk) 00:31, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If that's the pathway you want to use. You seem to have answered Scott's question above, which is a good step if you want to make another request now. If you do, you will also need to explain what edits you want to make and how they will be different based on your understanding of what a reliable source is. 331dot (talk) 00:46, 7 January 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

Because now I know that pages like imdb and famousbirthdays.com aren't reliable and I want to contribute to Wikipedia with information that can be backed up with good sources

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficiently convincing for any reviewing administrator to take action. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. Yamla (talk) 12:00, 6 February 2019 (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.

A page you started (Mads Sjøgård Pettersen) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Mads Sjøgård Pettersen.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

For when you get unblocked, you should be aware that while the subject is notable for receiving an Amanda Award, the article needs much more and better sources in order for the content to be verifiable.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Rosguill}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

_signed,Rosguill ^talk 06:15, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay but I doubt I will be unblocked.Auley (talk) 10:22, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Rosguill: The answer is above :/ Auley (talk) 10:23, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]