User talk:Amyseekuif

Hello, Amyseekuif! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! --Avant-garde a clue-hexa Chord ² 16:48, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

February 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Jennifer Hudson (album) has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Alansohn (talk) 22:29, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The recent edit you made to the page Jennifer Hudson (album) constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 22:55, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsay Lohan

There were several problems with your edits:

You deleted information with a proper source:

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Lindsay Lohan, you will be blocked from editing. Ward3001 (talk) 16:18, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You added information sourced with a tabloid:

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Lindsay Lohan. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

You wrote your own interpretation of her music:

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to Lindsay Lohan, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Ward3001 (talk) 16:18, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lindsay Lohan. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Ward3001 (talk) 17:33, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I omitted the source you did not like. If you revert anything on this article in the next 24 hours, I will immediately make a WP:3RR report, and you will be blocked from editing. Ward3001 (talk) 18:10, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Lindsay Lohan. Alansohn (talk) 18:15, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are asking for a block

You have been given a final warning above by another editor. You have already violated WP:3RR. Consider this your second final warning. Revert anything in Lindsay Lohan again in the next 24 hours and you will be blocked. Ward3001 (talk) 18:19, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule at Lindsay Lohan. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. Ruslik (talk) 19:54, 23 February 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

what the hell, i didnt do anything wrong......i just helped, i made ward realize that a review on the 'a little more personal raw' section was not a professional one...this is so unfair......

Decline reason:

Your request to be unblocked is declined because it does not address the reason for your block or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince administrators either (a) that the block was made in error or (b) that the block is no longer necessary because you understand what you are blocked for, you will not do it again and you will make productive contributions instead. Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. Sandstein 21:43, 23 February 2009 (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.

Did you notice all those WP:3RR warnings, up above? Might have been a good idea to read those. – Luna Santin (talk) 20:56, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Unblocked by User:Ruslik0.

Request handled by: — Aitias // discussion 18:14, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

is anyone gonna reply to my unblock request.......i've been waiting alot.............

I unblocked you. Please, familiarize yourself with 3 revert rule (and other Wikipedia policies). Edit warring is frowned upon here. Instead of reverting you should have discussed necessary changes with other editors on the article's talk page. Ruslik (talk) 16:45, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On the 6/J-Lo

A tag has been placed on On the 6/J-Lo, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bingo-101a (talk • contribs) 23:17, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In case you didn't notice, the album has already been released entitled "The Singles Collection". Type it into google search and you'll get several pages validating the veracity of said statement. Next time you try and change the page I will report you for vandalism. Alexander.hugh.george (talk) 00:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)Alex[reply]

You have been blocked for a period of 34 hours for disruptive editing. To contest this block, please reply here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} along with the reason you believe the block is unjustified, or email the blocking administrator. For alternative methods to appeal, see Wikipedia:Appealing a block. Daniel Case (talk) 03:25, 25 February 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

i didnt disrupt anything......there's no such album titled the singles collection released by jennifer lopez..if there is such an album, why isnt it available on Amazon.com or HMV.....i didnt do anything wrong.....this block is clearly unjustified.....this is so unfair, i didnt disrupt anything...........i didnt violate any rules........alexander.hugh.george is the one who's disrupting...someone make him understand that such an album was never released, hes the one that should be blocked........im really sick of admins blocking innocent users that are just helping and improving wikipedia.......I WAS JUST REMOVNING WRONG UNSOURCED INFORMATION, AND SO YOU BLOCK ME......WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU........IM JUST HELPING......THERE'S NO SUCH ALBUM............is everyone sleeping or something.......why isnt anyone doing anything.............i didnt vandalize anything , i didnt do anything wrong, i was removing wrong false unsourced untrue info about an album that is not official and was never officially released by lopez or her label......so why the am i blocked............this is going way out of line........look at all my contributions, i always put correct information and i always put sources, and i remove unsourced false information......and im just helping , why did you block me, what is wrong with you.....if you want to keep wrong false information, then fine, i wont edit that page again, do with it whatever you want, i really dont care anymore.....ok, so can you unblock me now.......

Decline reason:

No valid unblock reason given. You ignored multiple warnings to stop. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:28, 25 February 2009 (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.

why isnt anyone unblocking me, it says on Wikipedia:Blocking policy and Wikipedia:Appealing a block, that administrators should not unblock users without discussing with the blocking admin except in cases where the block is clearly unjustified."

and this block is clearly unjustified.......so, someone unblock me....

WHATS TAKING SO LONG TO ANSWER THE UNJUSTIFIED UNBLOCK REQUEST......WHY DO I HAVE TO WAIT LIKE 10 HOURS BEFORE SOMEONE CHECKS IT......

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).

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

Request reason:

ok, i really feel like crying now, cause i didnt do anything wrong.......how can you be so cruel.....

Decline reason:

I'm sorry that you're feeling bad, but your unblock request has already been reviewed and declined. Please don't continue to use the unblock template by listing the same comments again. I hope you will be back in a day or so and have a better experience here. Dekimasuよ! 15:47, 25 February 2009 (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.

BUT THIS IS NOT FAIR.........I WAS JUST REMOVING FALSE INFORMATION.........WHY CANT ANYONE UNDERSTAND THAT........PLEASE LET ME EXPLAIN MYSELF......

THIS IS THE MOST UNFAIR/UNJUSTIFIED BLOCK IVE SEEN IN ON WIKIPEDIA...........

You can see the reasons given for your block at this link. I fully understand that you think you were making valid edits, but doing the same action repeatedly without discussion, typing in caps, and trouble assuming good faith on the part of other editors is the main cause of the problem here. You're sure to find people around Wikipedia who disagree with you, but it's important to collaborate with them anyway, and definitely best to remain civil about it. Like I said, I hope you will have a more enjoyable time after your block ends. Dekimasuよ! 16:00, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BUT I WASNT DISRUPTING ANYTHING......I WILL NOT ACCEPT TO WAIT FOR THIS BLOCK TO END............IT MUST END NOW.........I WAS JUST REMOVING UNSOURCED UNTRUE FALSE INFORMATION.......

Please take a little time out to read WP:CHILL. Dekimasuよ! 16:28, 25 February 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

im really sorry......i really learned my lesson......please....believe me.............i still didnt read all the rules of wikipedia yet.........so sorry if i seem a bit lost, please forgive me....i wont repeat it again............im begging you........im only human, i make mistakes but i cant turn back time......forgive me.........i deserve a second chance....let me prove that i changed.......part of being human is to make mistakes .....and learn from them......and i did.....so, please, belive me when i say i wont do it again......................................we all deserve a second chance

Decline reason:

That doesn't address your block reason, but you will have your second (and probably last) chance as soon as the block expires. Sandstein 22:31, 25 February 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

i wont disrupt wikipedia and i will never ever make disruptive edits again.....i understand that what i did was wrong and i should not have done it........believe me........give me a second chance.......i wont do it again....i really mean it..........please forgive me.......im really sorry.....................i promise to be Civil, Mature, and Responsible.....

Decline reason:

If three independent administrators have declined your request, you should consider the possibility that the block is a valid one. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:21, 26 February 2009 (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.

Sockpuppet investigation

You have been accused of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Brexx. Thank you. Siawase (talk) 15:29, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Explain

Can someone tell me why im not able to edit protected pages anymore......like, the pages of Jennifer Lopez and Lindsay Lohan, i dont get it.....i was able to edit them before.....why now im not able??