User talk:Djmex9205

July 2014

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Motion picture rating system has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Motion picture rating system was changed by Djmex9205 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.969753 on 2014-07-06T13:23:27+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 13:23, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Motion picture rating system has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Motion picture rating system was changed by Djmex9205 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.864557 on 2014-07-14T14:20:15+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 14:20, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Djmex9205, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits to the page Motion picture rating system have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may be removed if they have not yet been. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Betty Logan (talk) 14:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Motion picture rating system

Will you please stop altering the US entry at Motion picture rating system to indicate an age specification for the PG rating. The MPAA does not offer age guidance for this rating. For a fuller explanation see Talk:Motion_picture_rating_system#US_PG_rating. Betty Logan (talk) 19:21, 14 July 2014 (UTC) Betty ok look your right but 10 year olds don't need parental guidance there older children PG is for young children not old. I mean come man :D[reply]

July 2014

Your recent editing history at Motion picture rating system 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. 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. Betty Logan (talk) 20:43, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have filed an incident report at WP:AN3#User:Djmex9205 reported by User:Betty Logan (Result: ) regarding your conduct. Betty Logan (talk) 21:13, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. ♥ Solarra ♥ ^{♪ 話 ♪} ߷ _{♀ 投稿 ♀} 21:50, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Djmex9205, If you want to avoid a block, it would be sensible for you to reply at WP:AN3 and agree to wait for consensus before editing Motion picture rating system again. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 21:53, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And don't change other peoples' comments: you can be blocked for disruptive editing if you continue. Just address the issues. Acroterion (talk) 21:56, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistent disruptive editing. 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 the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Acroterion (talk) 23:29, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS Account Request

I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. Djmex9205 (talk)

Warning?

Edits like this [1], demonstrate you may not understand how things get done here. The first "person" to revert you wasn't even a person, it was a Bot, a script that detects vandalism with an impressive track record. Although you may not have intended to vandalise, the bot saw the edit as very unproductive, hence the revert. In the future, do not imbed threats in articles using hidden text, and for that matter, you shouldn't be threatening anyone with a block as you have neither the technical ability nor full understanding of when a block is appropriate, as demonstrated by this very edit. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 19:26, 15 July 2014 (UTC). Ok Dennis Brown thanks for telling me I was taking this a bit way too serious ill be careful for this time stupid bots.[reply]

July 2014

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Motion picture rating system has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Motion picture rating system was changed by Djmex9205 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.857546 on 2014-07-17T13:40:14+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 13:40, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Following further disruptive activity at Motion picture rating system following the conclusion of your block I have raised further concerns regarding your conduct at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Continuation_of_disruptive_activity_by_a_SPA_account. Betty Logan (talk) 14:13, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 14:31, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notes: CIR concerns, inability to work with others and old fashioned sockpuppetry. Examples: Djmex9205 [2] and RazorShotter [3] Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 14:32, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've revoked talk/email here and on his sock (which claimed to be an admin) and other misc behaviors. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 16:30, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]