User talk:Bastista1

June 2012

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to No Way Out (2012), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. – Richard BB 00:10, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WWE Champions question

Why are you changing the page when it's clear that the WWE Championship is first and the WHC is second. Also the Diva's Championship is after the tag titles. Why?--Mikeymike2001 (talk) 15:53, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

July 2012

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring, as you did at List of current champions in WWE. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. — foxj 08:18, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CM Punk

Take care not to remove valid info and references please. The previous editor created an unnecessary WP:JARGON/WP:NOR "Heel Turn" sub-head and I'm totally cool with wanting to avoid that, but just undoing that last revision would have done the trick with no info lost. Thanks. Papacha (talk) 12:53, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from CM Punk with this edit. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Krenair ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:42, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to CM Punk, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Papacha (talk) 23:45, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at CM Punk, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Please give a reason why you're deleting the information. I'm not being testy with you, but you've done six heavy deletions sans explanation that have been undone by three seperate users and killed two versions of it twice. Papacha (talk) 00:01, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 2012

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Hell in a Cell (2012), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. BarryTheUnicorn (talk) 16:46, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your edit warring and discuss your edits on the relevant talk pages. Multiple editors have explained to you why your edits are erroneous. Please take these into consideration instead of instigating an edit war. – Richard BB 11:58, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Hell in a Cell (2012) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. – Richard BB 12:00, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 days for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Alexf^(talk) 12:02, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Hell in a Cell (2012), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. You've already been blocked once for this edit warring. Stop now, and you won't get blocked a third time. – Richard BB 06:20, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

3MB

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a search with the contents of 3MB, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: The Band (WWE). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. MadmanBot (talk) 01:16, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A message

Please see the message that I left on the Hell in the Cell talk page; it concerns you and I think will be very helpful. – Richard BB 09:29, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of 3MB

The article 3MB has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Subject lacks notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Dch eagle | ^{Join the Fight!} 12:40, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

3MB

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give The Band (WWE) a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into 3MB. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. --Jtalledo (talk) 18:37, 16 October 2012 (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. Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:56, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit-warring, disruptive editing, and refusal to collaborate, as you did at Hell in a Cell (2012). Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 13:40, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Hell in a Cell (2012), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Dude, you've just been unblocked. Please stop now. This is the sort of reason why you got blocked, and I'm guessing the next block will be longer than a week. It may even be indefinite. – Richard BB 20:57, 28 October 2012 (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. Thank you. Keith Okamoto (talk) 18:23, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Warning. Apparently, the latest battle you're engaged in is whether to call a person C-M Punk or CM Punk at Survivor Series (2012). You're insisting on your version (C-M Punk). At the same time, as before, you simply don't discuss the issues that trigger these small wars. You've been blocked multiple times in the past for similar behavior, and, thus far, it hasn't made a dent. So, here's the deal. Either you respond here or on the article talk page or at WP:ANEW as to what you're doing and why, or one more revert will result in an indefinite block.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:36, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

November 2012

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for edit warring, as you did at Survivor Series (2012). If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Bbb23 (talk) 02:02, 19 November 2012 (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).

Bastista1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I removed the 3MB from the Survivor Series page because they did not have a page created for them. I demand to be unblocked immediately. Bastista1 (talk) 02:05, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

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.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 02:11, 19 November 2012 (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).

Bastista1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Alright, fine! I won't edit the names of the wrestlers to my own liking. There. Happy? Bastista1 (talk) 02:14, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This is your fourth block for breaking the same rule, and it's not at all clear that you understand the rule that you are blocked for breaking. If you don't understand the rule, you are likely to break it again, and cause further disruption. I think it would be better to leave your account blocked until you've carefully read the rule about edit-warring and understand it well enough to be able to follow it. Otherwise, you'd just be re-blocked, which would be extra work for everyone.

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 checked your contribution history, and I notice that, although you've now been blocked four times for edit-warring, you have, according to your contribution history, never made an edit to an article talk page discussing a change you want to make. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:21, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{unblock|reason=Whatever. Fuck you. Bastista1 (talk) 02:22, 19 November 2012 (UTC)}},[reply]

I've disabled this, since it is not an unblock request. Am I correct in gathering that you refuse to read the rule, or that you have read it, but refuse to follow it? If you aren't going to be using this talk page for anything more useful than the above, I would be happy to disable your access to it. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:23, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing your talkpage due to abuse of the unblock process. You may still contest any current block by using the unblock ticket request system, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 02:26, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]