User talk:M900417

AB CD EF GH

April 2020[edit]

Hello, I'm Jcoolbro. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Sophie Turner—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. Jcoolbro (talk) (c) 20:47, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jcoolbro: in what terms that they are not constructive, they are both referenced but you did not bother to check them. I would bring my edits back if you do not give an explanation. M900417 (talk) 20:51, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@M900417:Apollogies for that. Thank you for telling me. I revert vandalism and must've made a mistake. you may remove the warning from your talk page if you would like. Jcoolbro (talk) (c) 21:08, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Hi M900417! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Jcoolbro (talk) (c) 23:35, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Statue[edit]

@Surtsicna: I read this article about Alfred the Great, they have the statue in the infobox! M900417 (talk) 21:43, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Perhaps that article needs some attention too. Images of 19th-century statues and paintings make sense in sections such as Legacy or Fictional portrayals but not in infoboxes. See WP:LEADIMAGE. Surtsicna (talk) 21:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Surtsicna: It seems that you are only after my edits as you did to Raymond IV, Count of Toulouse, when you removed the portrait, meanwhile other articles such as, Bohemond I of Antioch or Robert Curthose, have portraits in the infobox! However, I would retrieve my edits unless you add a legacy section for each article, because I simply do not want an edit war ! M900417 (talk) 00:28, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not only after your edits. The infoboxes in the articles about Bohemond and Robert should not have fantasy portraits either. Surtsicna (talk) 08:20, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The images of the statue are not essential in the biographies. The statue is significant in art history, not in a general biography article. There is no reason to seek to include it at all costs. Besides, there is a whole article about the statue. Pasting images of it across half a dozen articles is pointless. Surtsicna (talk) 08:39, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lara Croft; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

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 and 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. Crossroads ^-talk- 02:39, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have you edited under another account?[edit]

If so, can you identify your past Wikipedia accounts? Snooganssnoogans (talk) 23:52, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Snooganssnoogans: What are the reasons for this question?! M900417 (talk) 23:58, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2020[edit]

Hello, I'm Doniago. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Vlad the Impaler, 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. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please also see WP:IPCV. DonIago (talk) 01:52, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doniago: The related articles themselves are the sources here! I simply ask you to read each one of articles to verify whether it is about Vlad, it will only take less than two minutes of your time. The name of Vlad Dracula is mentioned in all of these articles, but you decided to remove the sourced content of Assassin's Creed: Revelations, without even blinking. I would retrieve my edits because you removed all the edits, not the unsourced ones as you claimed, and you did not bother to check the articles. M900417 (talk) 03:54, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As I noted above, the sources you provided may have verified the references but did not establish their significance, as required by WP:IPCV. Please provide sources that establish that the pop culture references you're listing are considered significant in some manner. Also, per WP:BRD, please do not reinsert your material without providing better references or establishing a WP:CONSENSUS to add it as-is. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 03:59, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doniago: Read this article, Ishak Pasha, for instance, they mentioned where the person was depicted, but not all content was sourced. When he was not mentioned clearly in Assassin's Creed: Revelations I added a reference, meanwhile if he were clearly mentioned in the other articles, so why would anyone claim that he was in a video game when he was not! You are simply asking me to count all the stars in the sky, even though you know that I can not, just to have the final decision of removing the "unsourced" content, yet you removed sourced content once ! M900417 (talk) 04:13, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I'm watching this page, so you don't need to ping me (just trying to help, not admonishing). Thank you for bringing that article to my attention; I've tagged the pop culture section for needing additional sources. In any case, it's a bad idea to use one article as an example for why another article should be written in the same manner; as discussed at WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, it's entirely possible that the example is itself poorly-written. I'm not sure what sourced content you're referring to that established that the appearance of Vlad the Impaler in the pop culture references you listed attracted significant attention. Rather than saying "Vlad appears in X", I would suggest trying to focus on things such as "Vlad's appearance in X was rated as one of the top ten portrayals of the man in the last century." Focus on why the appearance matters, not simply that it occurred. I hope this helps. DonIago (talk) 04:34, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Prithviraj Chauhan. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Outlander^07@talk 18:36, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Outlander07: please read the video game article Age of Empires II HD: The Forgotten to verify, it is really hard to simply find a source mentions his name in the game.

Sane Account[edit]

Hey, I noticed you're the most recent to edit the sane account could you unlock it if anything happens I promise to take full responsibility Wikii mel (talk) 19:17, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikii mel: Sorry! I am not an admin! M900417 (talk) 19:23, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020[edit]

Hello, I'm JMHamo. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Timo Werner, 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. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. JMHamo (talk) 21:44, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@JMHamo: Have you read the source before reverting my edits? Can you press ctrl+F within the source then write (Daniel Frahn) ?! M900417 (talk) 00:27, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Chloë Grace Moretz. 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 noticeboards.
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. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 14:50, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@4TheWynne: you call sourced edits disruptive ?! this is your opinion so do not come here to threaten of blocking ! M900417 (talk) 22:39, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NOTATABLOID – we've consistently chosen not to include that information at this article, as Wikipedia is not a place to list all of the people a person has dated. You've added a questionable source (Cosmopolitan) and one that definitely shouldn't be used (Elite Daily) based on the title of the source alone ("A Brief History Of Everyone Chloë Grace Moretz Has Ever Dated, & Wow, She Has Great Taste"), and you've taken information from the former and made the assumption that Moretz is dating a Playboy model, even though the source (to its credit) legitimately says "Though the pair haven't publicly announced they're dating...". 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 03:13, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

4TheWynne, compare this and this. M900417 is a CadAPL sock. Popped up after their Ancientman0 sock was blocked. Pinging NinjaRobotPirate, who blocked the Ancientman0 sock. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 05:06, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:26, 9 July 2020 (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).

M900417 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This User:Flyer22 Frozen claimed that I used to be another blocked user 5 months ago, only because it happened that I added similar info ! he did not check the source but instead reported my account to be a sockpuppet ! Good luck Wikipedia if you block people based on reports from rats ! I ask to keep this account because the accusations are baseless, he wanted to revert my edits, so he did what he did, as he seems obsessed enough to even remember what happened 4 months ago in Megan Fox's article ! M900417 (talk) 17:43, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

"reports from rats", yeah, you are done here. Talk page access revoked. Yamla (talk) 18:10, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This block is based on technical "CheckUser" data, which is what shows abuse. This explanation does not deal with your confirmed abuse of multiple accounts. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 18:11, 9 July 2020 (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.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.