User talk:Almostangelic123

Hey thanks for keeping up the info! You forgot to add that Marilyn Manson played in 2015s "Street Level". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:407:C480:5A70:85BC:4938:3959:65C0 (talk) 02:06, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paris Hilton

Well, you should take a look at other public figures' pages then. NiceBC (talk) 04:05, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Matildaxcx, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Matildaxcx! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Lectonar (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:05, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bip Ling (November 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dan arndt was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Fails WP:ANYBIO - requires significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources. Famous Birthdays and LastFM are not reliable or acceptable sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bip Ling and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Bip Ling, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dan arndt (talk) 07:38, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Lady Gaga. 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. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 13:54, 3 December 2018 (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 notice boards.
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 Rihanna, you may be blocked from editing. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 23:09, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Lana Del Rey. 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. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 13:44, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An extended welcome

Hi Matildaxcx. Welcome to Wikipedia. I've added a welcome message to the top of this page that gives a great deal of information about Wikipedia. I hope you find it useful.

Additionally, I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily.

Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.

If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter.

Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.

I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. --Ronz (talk) 01:40, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! --Ronz (talk) 03:52, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please respond

Hi Matildaxcx. Could you please respond here? There are problems with your edits, and it's unclear if you have read anything here. --Ronz (talk) 16:29, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bip Ling (December 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by AngusWOOF were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Still a large number of poorly referenced links (IMDb, Genius, last.fm, Amazon, famous birthdays, Celebs Money/Facts) that is making it difficult to assess notability.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bip Ling and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Bip Ling, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:19, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Girli, 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. Thank you. — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 23:24, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Björk. -- Rrburke (talk) 14:00, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Bip Ling has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Bip Ling. Thanks! CNMall41 (talk) 01:46, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Gwen Stefani. Binksternet (talk) 04:23, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mark Duplass, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Creep (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) 09:18, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Matildaxcx, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Nikki Grahame have been removed, as they appear to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:29, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 00:26, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bip Ling (January 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Chetsford was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The handful of WP:RS (Guardian, W, Vogue) fail the test of WP:INDEPENDENT as they are Q&A-style interviews and don't really provide biographical information in any case.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bip Ling and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Bip Ling, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Chetsford (talk) 17:50, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Cheryl (singer). 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 be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 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 lead to a block. Thank you. Linguist111^{my talk page} 16:35, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 01:02, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:35, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sophie (musician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page QT (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:33, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nikki Grahame

look, i’m not doubting your references on Nikki Grahame, but the reason i cleaned up her article is because it’s messy. the article uses 'nikki' rather than 'grahame' when referring to her, the ‘years active’ date is wrong, and there is unnecessary info in the intro. she’s not notable for going back to BB in 2015, so it doesn’t belong in the intro. i’m going to clean the article of this mess, unless you want to. Joesimnett (talk) 14:24, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019

Please refrain from changing genres, as you did to MØ, without providing a source or establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Thank you. snapsnap ^(talk) 04:17, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Katie Hopkins, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ITV (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) 16:12, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Summer Heights High into Chris Lilley (comedian). While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:38, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 2019

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Cheryl (singer); 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. livelikemusic talk! 12:23, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

When citing something in article text, please don't use other Wikipedia articles as references. See WP:Citing sources and WP:Verifiability#Wikipedia and sources that mirror or use it for more. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:46, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Your recent editing history at Dannii Minogue shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.NEDOCHAN (talk) 13:44, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2019

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. I see you still aren't consistently using these. Please implement them for as many of your edits as possible in the future. That will help give people a better idea of what you're trying to do. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 21:38, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: John Haze has been accepted

John Haze, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-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. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

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!

Theroadislong (talk) 19:26, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Katie Price Bankruptcy

Hello,

when someone or a company is made "Bankrupt" by the courts it means that they have no net worth and they have far more debts than collateral.

Any collateral / assets are taking into control by the appointed administrators and the entity is either run a going concern until a buyer is found, wound up or broken up & sold off, anything left money-wise after that is divided up to the registered debtors.

Therefore you can not have a net worth of £45 million Pounds Sterling if you are a bankrupt in the UK - And as a bankrupt you are not even allowed to have a normal daily bank account only a basic one until you have been discharged from bankruptcy.

Yours

Juanpumpchump (talk) 14:37, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2019

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Hairspray (2007 film). Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 14:43, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Girli

Hello. Is there a reason why File:Girli 2019.jpg is an inappropriate photo for the Girli article? I assumed you'd removed it accidentally, but I see you've taken it off again. Is it of a different person with the same name? --Lord Belbury (talk) 20:17, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is my photo and I no longer want it used. Wiki commons is looking into deleting it for me so I will remove until further notice. Almostangelic123 (talk) 20:53, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see anything on Commons about that, from here, but okay. --Lord Belbury (talk) 21:14, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 22

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Kate Garraway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Broadcaster

Lorraine Kelly (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Daybreak

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kate McKinnon

those are not minor edits! Butchdagger (talk) 20:58, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Amanda Bynes, 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. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 01:03, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Amanda Bynes, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 01:06, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits

This is the third request for you to stop marking edits as minor inappropriately, as you did at Katie Hopkins. READ WP:MINOR to inform yourself about what is and is not a minor edit. Continuing to do this after three requests is disruptive editing and may result in a block from editing. 173.209.178.244 (talk) 17:57, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Amanda Bynes. Sundayclose (talk) 02:18, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 29

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Charli XCX, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Start Hill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2020

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at Amanda Bynes, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Sundayclose (talk) 01:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked for a period of 1 week from editing Wikipedia articles directly. The block is necessary because of a persistent disruptive lack of communication, and to prevent further edit warring. You need to discuss changes on the talk pages of articles, and can still do so. The block only prevents you from ignoring others' concerns by directly editing the article. It is your task to convince others on the talk page to restore your contributions.
Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make careful contributions without edit warring. You may not resume the same behavior when the block has expired, or you will be blocked again.

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 ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:29, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Amanda Bynes, you may be blocked from editing. Sundayclose (talk) 15:31, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mark Heap, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page British.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Disaster Movie. Sundayclose (talk) 01:00, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are ASKING for an indefinite block

Another unsourced edit. This repeated defiance of Wikipedia policy and your utter refusal to communicate and contemptuous attitude very likely will result in an indefinite block. If there is something about "unsourced" that you don't understand, now is the time to ask here because the next time there won't be a warning, just a block. Sundayclose (talk) 15:07, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What unsourced edit have I made exactly? If you’re talking about the epic movie one. That was already there in the lead, I just organised the lead into 2 paragraphs. I never added that part. Maybe who added it and go to them instead of making accusations!! I will block you if you give me anymore of your cheek and assumptions! Almostangelic123 (talk) 15:11, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Go back and look and see who added that part as it was not me. I simply just decided the lead into 2 sections after I added cast to infobox which I added a summerary when I edited it. Do your job properly Almostangelic123 (talk) 15:13, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Divided* Almostangelic123 (talk) 15:13, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct. I was too hasty. Apologies. But I still strongly suggest that you make a better effort to communicate. Sundayclose (talk) 15:16, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And I suggest you don’t jump to conclusions and watch your attitude as comes across not very well to me. Almostangelic123 (talk) 15:19, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited A. J. Cook, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:59, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 30

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Catherine O'Hara, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:45, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. Thanks! – DarkGlow (✉) 13:28, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. Thanks! – DarkGlow (contribs • talk) 02:13, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Charli XCX

Why are you willing to undo my edit almost immediately, and yet chose not to engage in a conversation you suggested I start for over three months? We are clearly reading the infobox guidelines differently, but I want to understand where that difference is, and doing that through edit summaries is hardly constructive. Please discuss this with me more openly on the Talk:Charli XCX page rather than simply reverting me. Sock (~~tock~~ talk) 21:57, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tulisa

Good afternoon, Almostangelic123, can you please revert the last edit on the Tulisa page as it removed valid sourced content? Many thanks and enjoy the rest of your weekend. 92.40.192.9 (talk) 16:12, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Courtney Stodden

Hi. Please do not blank passages from Wikipedia without providing a rationale for doing so in an edit summary or talk page discussion, as you did with this edit to Courtney Stodden. You've already been warned and blocked numerous times disruptive editing, including for blanking content, and should know by now that when removing material, it is exprected that editors specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 05:50, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Banoffee

Hello, Almostangelic123. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Banoffee, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occurred, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:02, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Janet Street-Porter

Your recent edit to this page introduced an error. Street-Porter was specifically appointed fashion editor of the Evening Standard, not editor of the paper. I have therefore returned to the accurate previous version. Rodericksilly (talk) 04:06, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Dannii Minogue. You really should understand by now why you shouldn't be reinstating WP:UGC sources to support a WP:DOB. Toddst1 (talk) 02:06, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Dannii Minogue. Sundayclose (talk) 02:23, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Dannii Minogue shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Toddst1 (talk) 15:20, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok sorry Almostangelic123 (talk) 16:31, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Kim Woodburn, you may be blocked from editing. – Meena • 15:01, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Paris Hilton

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Paris Hilton, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 00:51, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed 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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]