User talk:Abigblueworld

Welcome!

Hi Abigblueworld! 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! — ItsSkV08 (talk) 04:50, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 2021

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Reel FX Creative Studios. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges on that page. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges.

I'd also like to apologize for my earlier mistake but that doesn't excuse the continuous edit warring. Philipnelson99 (talk) 04:54, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Opera. 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. Stop doing this. Per WP:BRD it is up to you to take a contested edit to the article's talk page to attempt to get consensus form other editors. Meters (talk) 02:27, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

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

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Music, you may be blocked from editing. Stop restoring your word salad. Discuss contested content on the article's talk page. And please read WP:EW Meters (talk) 02:29, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at User:Meters. Enough. Do not post anything to my user page. It is not a talk page. And do not post anything to my talk page either, because I am fed up. You appear to be trolling. Meters (talk) 02:36, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at 3D modeling. Pachu Kannan (talk) 02:51, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! Abigblueworld, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:23, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Personal information

Hello, Abigblueworld,

It's not a good idea to share your IP number because with that information, another editor can easily find information about you like where you live. We prize anonymity on Wikipedia and keeping personal information to a minimum except for what you choose to share with other editors. So, I recommend you don't share this information in your edits or edit summaries. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:35, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Adventure

If you are interested in working on Wikipedia skills, the Wikipedia Adventure may be helpful. Just plain Bill (talk) 00:18, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Abigblueworld reported by User:StarryNightSky11 (Result: ). Thank you. StarryNightSky11^(talk) 02:50, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages

Pretending that you don't know how to post to an article's talk page is not going to work. You have already posted at least one question to an article talk page. Stop messing around or you will be at WP:AIV or WP:ANI. Meters (talk) 02:52, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. Kinu ^t/_c 02:55, 15 August 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

Why forever 💔 I’m trying my hardest from the bottom of my big heart to have strong good faith and now, you block me forever 🤯😢😢😢😢

Decline reason:

You are not blocked "forever", you are blocked until the issues that led to the block have been addressed. I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. 331dot (talk) 06:51, 15 August 2021 (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.

If you are trying, (rather than trolling) then this is a clear case of WP:CIR Meters (talk) 03:00, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Non-admin comment as per WP:INDEF, indefinite blocks aren't infinite, they can be lifted if the issues are resolved, looking at the recent history of your edits and edit wars on multiple pages, including a possible personal attack in one edit summary, you have a lot to do to convince whichever admin reviews your appeal that it should be lifted. StarryNightSky11^(talk) 03:05, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not trolling, again, how was I, sorry... 😐😑😐 Abigblueworld (talk) 03:37, 15 August 2021 (UTC) who at the moment is mad/sad mixed.[reply]

Non-admin comment: If you wish to submit another request, you are more than welcome to do so, however you must show that you won't repeat the same behaviour that resulted in the original block, then you'll stand a far better chance of an admin accepting your appeal and un-blocking you. Best StarryNightSky11^(talk) 20:44, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Second 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).

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

Request reason:

sorry, I won’t do the disruptive edits, or so, I started reading the lines out loud to help myself with editing, give me one more chance.

Decline reason:

This unblock request is incoherent. Yamla (talk) 17:34, 18 August 2021 (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.

Appealing (because you asked)

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).

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

Request reason:

I will not make random edits, I am sorry for trying my best and I will try to watch for repeats next time. I’m super sorry and I won’t ever do it again. As long as no trolling happens 😜

Decline reason:

Confirmed block evasion. I have strengthened the block as a result. Yamla (talk) 22:57, 20 September 2021 (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’m not block evading, also, how is my name that? Abigblueworld (talk) 23:04, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely to prevent abuse.
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. You may instead email the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-enwikimedia.org with your username and appeal.

Administrators: CheckUsers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. Therefore, a Checkuser must be consulted before this block can be removed. Administrators undoing checkuser blocks without permission or the prior approval from a checkuser risk having their administrator rights removed by the Arbitration Committee (per this announcement).

Ban evasion?

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).

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

Request reason:

I’m not block evading, why do you think I am. I had this account to hide my IP address. So please?

Decline reason:

You most certainly are evading a block – by your own admission, even (admins: [1]). Given both your logged-out contributions and those under this account, I am inclined to believe that this is trolling; continuing the conversation certainly isn't going to be a productive use of anyone's time. Talk page access revoked. --Blablubbs (talk) 12:18, 21 September 2021 (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.

September 2021

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 for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

--Blablubbs (talk) 12:19, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]