User talk:1.43.110.199

Thanks for your message on my talk page. I'm not quite understanding the problem with wiping out references etc. at the bottom of articles whenever you insert a filmography. These tables are of moderate size and should not cause an overflow within the editing window. If you could take good care when inserting content not to overwrite what comes underneath, this would be appreciated.

On another point, as you are a frequent and constructive contributor to Wikipedia, would you consider creating an account? This would furnish you with a continuing identity corresponding to your work here, and would make communications much easier. Regards: Bhunacat10 (talk), 08:00, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Brian Wenzel, 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. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 08:12, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Bhunacat10 was kind enough to explain this issue with you before. Please do not remove the reference section when adding the filmography. If there is some sort of issue you are having, please discuss it here and we'll get it sorted out. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 08:14, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions so far. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

Here are some links to pages you may find useful:

• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• Simplified Manual of Style

You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but if you wish to acquire additional privileges, you can simply create a named account. It's free, requires no personal information, and lets you:

• Create new pages and rename pages
• Edit semi-protected pages
• Upload images
• Have your own watchlist, which shows when articles you are interested in have changed

Note that in order for the first three features to be available, you must have had an account for a certain number of days and made a certain number of edits.

If you edit without using a named account, your IP address (1.43.110.199) is used to identify you instead.

I hope that you, as a Wikipedian, decide to continue contributing to our project: an encyclopedia of human knowledge that anyone can edit. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. We also have an intuitive guide on editing if you're interested. By the way, please make sure to sign and date your talk page comments with four tildes (~~~~).

Happy editing! –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 08:46, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to formally welcome you to the project and offer up these great resources. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 08:47, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Shane Porteous, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Today again you have wiped out references, external links, templates and categories from the foot of an article. While your additions are certainly constructive, these accidental deletions are damaging to articles and I have to ask you to take further steps to avoid any repetition : Bhunacat10 (talk), 09:00, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Tommy Dysart has been reverted.
Your edit here to Tommy Dysart was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links in references which are discouraged per our reliable sources guideline. The reference(s) you added or changed (https://www.discogs.com/artist/4973230-Tom-Dysart) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 08:25, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Henry Lawson, you may be blocked from editing. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 17:25, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Wtmitchell: hello there! My friend the Wayward Vagabond (my personal nickname for the IP) here does not really understand Wiki-syntax but is a well meaning contributor. I don't think that the edit in question was vandalism, but it seems like a simple mistake. Taking a look at their edit history, would you agree with that assessment? –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 17:40, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

yes, he was of a well meaning, but it is okay it is all a learning process on here — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.43.110.199 (talk) 17:43, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WV, we have a birth_name parameter. Please don't edit war when you want to make a useful contribution. This is why we have the WP:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. This issue has now been fixed. (edit conflict × 2) –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 17:45, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, you gotta sign your posts. It's really important. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 17:47, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MJL, I thank you also for your kindness and assistance, appreciated— Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.43.110.199 (talk) 17:53, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Henry Allingham. IdreamofJeanie (talk) 22:29, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours 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 ~~~~}}.  N.J.A. | talk 21:14, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

no need for block, this editor obviously doesn't understand wiki syntax, and also putting names in infobox, in full

Decline reason:

You're blocked for adding unsourced content, not using talk pages, and not using edit summaries. In your next unblock request, you should address these reasons. PhilKnight (talk) 21:43, 4 June 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.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

i will use edit summaries now, all i actually did was add a persons full name to the infobox, as all names in full are in all infobox section, clearly the person's name is cited in the article, otherwise it would not be added for being unsourced. always if i make a mistake, i always correct it, also i will use talk pages for clarity, generally my adding of content is faithful

Decline reason:

No, that's not all you did. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:26, 5 June 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.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make disruptive edits to Wikipedia contrary to the Manual of Style. DrKay (talk) 20:14, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

I warned you above that we don't put birth names in the infobox when the birth name is the same as the name, but you're still doing it[1]. Please stop. DrKay (talk) 16:04, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@DrKay: Hello! I am this user's WikiOtter and guardian protector (lol just kidding about the second bit, but I do monitor this user to keep them out of trouble). I am having issue with seeing the problem in that contribution. Mind explaining on my talk page for me? –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 16:40, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Archie Mountbatten-Windsor/Archive 1#Birth name. DrKay (talk) 16:53, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

...That isn't as conclusive a discussion (it's local consensus if anything) as I would've like to see for a {{uw-mos4}}
This just seems like personal preference rather than anything that is found in MOS:INFOBOX. Unless you get that guideline changed, I really don't see a problem with anything this user is doing in that regard. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 17:21, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this, cited where? Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:45, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Flyer22 Reborn: the citation isn't great, but the birth date is according to imdb while the name is from offline sources, I imagine (added here by 165.83.133.249. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 19:18, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MJL, IMDb is not a WP:Reliable source. See Wikipedia:Citing IMDb#Inappropriate uses and Wikipedia:External links/Perennial websites#IMDb. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 19:24, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Flyer22 Reborn: [Thank you for the ping] I'm currently about to head out, but I'll go and a find better source until then. Cheers, –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 19:27, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Gabriel, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. You may wish to consider registering an account so you can create articles yourself.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

–MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 00:39, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You were absolutely right to try and add the DOB to the lede of Bridgette Andersen. I reverted your edit because I've grown accustomed to editors adding unverified claims to that article, and that was not in good faith. I'm very sorry to have jumped the gun on your edit. — fourthords | =Λ= | 17:07, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions 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. CLCStudent (talk) 17:04, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Pedro Almodóvar. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. CLCStudent (talk) 14:48, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello. I noticed that you made an edit that introduces praise or promotional language to the The Loretta Young Show article. On Wikipedia, we adhere to a neutral point of view (NPOV) and avoid promotional language or puffery. Please read the NPOV policy page, as well as this page of language to avoid to better understand how to expand this article in a style suitable to an encyclopedia. If you have questions, please see the Help Desk page. Thank you! ―Susmuffin ^Talk 21:32, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Wtmitchell. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Craig Minogue— because it 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. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 12:14, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]