User talk:(Un)Lucky Duke

July 2023

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Barbie (film), did not appear to be constructive and have 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 your 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. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 10:23, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Barbie (film). 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. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 10:37, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How can it disruptive if it involves a real fact and real official statements confirmed by multiple reliable sources? (Un)Lucky Duke (talk) 10:39, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.— Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 10:40, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion about me for a normal edit? And why the word "dummy" is used in the discussion? (Un)Lucky Duke (talk) 10:56, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:DUMMY — Czello ^(music) 11:03, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My edit was supported by multiple reliable sources, still I don't get how can it be disruptive. (Un)Lucky Duke (talk) 11:08, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making test edits to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism, which, under Wikipedia policy, can lead to being blocked from editing. If you would like to experiment again, please use your sandbox. You seem to be gaming the system, this is your final warning. qedk (t 愛 c) 13:34, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't do any vandalism, I didn't do anything wrong, disruptive or in violation of Wikipedia policies and rules. So I'm gonna ask it again: My edit was supported by multiple reliable sources, still I don't get how can it be disruptive or vandalism. (Un)Lucky Duke (talk) 13:47, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Final Fantasy XVI. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 13:15, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What did I do?! (Un)Lucky Duke (talk) 14:31, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Courcelles (talk) 23:33, 30 July 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

On what reason you base your statement that I'm not here to contribute to Wikipedia, pardon me? I created my account less than 20 days ago and you block me indefinetely based on unknown and ambiguous basis? Less than 20 days ago, you don't even gave me the time to evolve as a good contributor, this is per se and alone not a good reason to block me indefinetely or even accuse me to not be here to be a contributor. (Un)Lucky Duke (talk) 04:04, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Per this diff. You have been focused on one and only one thing since you created this account: getting this into the article, and as that diff points out, it's not supported by the sources you cite, whatever you may believe. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:23, 1 August 2023 (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.

(Un)Lucky Duke (talk) 04:04, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]