User talk:DoubleHammy

July 2017

Hello, I'm Doniago. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Spider-Man in film, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 01:51, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DoubleHammy, you are invited to try Wikipedia training modules

If you're looking for some guidance on how to get started, try these training modules.

basic rules how to edit evaluating articles

adding images citing sources copyright rules

about these trainings

We're trying to improve our tools for helping new editors get started. These trainings are hosted on the "Programs & Events Dashboard", a tool for helping Wikipedia editors organize editing events. You can optionally log in using your Wikipedia account to keep track of which trainings you've completed.

If you have feedback, we'd love to hear it!

This message was delivered by HostBot (talk) 18:02, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DoubleHammy, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi DoubleHammy! 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 Rosiestep (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

20:02, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Spider-Man, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Aspening (talk) 00:22, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Wonder Woman (2017 film). This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. SummerPhD^v2.0 15:18, 26 July 2017 (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! SummerPhD^v2.0 16:59, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

August 2017

Hi. Please do not add unnecessary headings to the Wikipedia articles, did with this edit to the Spider-Man (Miles Morales) article. Headings and subheadings should only be used to divide sections that have grown too large. The Film section of the article only contains two paragraphs, which is not large enough to require division. If you continue to revert the article, it will be reverted back, and article may be protected from further edits. Please work with the community here to discuss edits you disagree with, usually on the article's talk page. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 12:46, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Harley Quinn, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. General Ization ^Talk 01:41, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Patrick Little (engineer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Republican Party (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) 10:19, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2018

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Flag of Germany, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:55, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced edits

Hi, this issue seems to have been pointed out multiple times, over a long timespan. Please be more careful! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:57, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, DoubleHammy. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:57, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2018

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Greeks, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Dr. K. 16:27, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Poles. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Dr. K. 16:30, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at White Southerners. Dr. K. 16:31, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Southern Unionist, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Constitutional Union Party (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 2

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

Southern Victory (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Black Hand and Revolutionary War

History of slavery in Maryland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Native Americans

List of alternate history fiction (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to French Empire

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018

Please do not add or change content, as you did at James G. Blaine, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:01, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Neo-Nazi classification

DoubleHammy: Adding people and musical groups to Template:Neo-Nazism is a serious accusation and should only be done with solid referencing (as indicated by an edit notice on the page). It's particularly grave when the subject is a living person. Yngvadottir (talk) 02:21, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 13

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 20

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

Autonome Nationalisten (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Antifa

Culture of the Southern United States (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Little Dixie

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Alt-right. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Kleuske (talk) 19:52, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 29

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Special Order 191, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page French Empire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited White nationalism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Socialist Movement (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nazis! Nazis Everywhere!

I have noticed you seem t have a penchant for decrying Nazis. Please remember that a Nazi is a member of the NSDAP (narrowly construed) and is different from a fascist. Also would you please stop introcuding original research and WP:EASTEREGGS in various articles. Thanks. Kleuske (talk) 18:54, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Again neo-nazis are not the same as "alt-right". I'm beginning to wonder if a topic ban might be appropriate, given the content of this page. Kleuske (talk) 22:08, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please cite correctly? This reference is useless since you did not include the full URL, but an abbreviated one (using ellipsis). Also sloganisms of a random participant are hardly relevant. Kleuske (talk) 23:14, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018

Warning regarding active remedies per WP:ARBAPDS

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

Along with other highly visible articles relating to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, Alt-right is currently subject to discretionary sanctions authorized by active arbitration remedies (see WP:ARBAPDS) per the edit notice and talk page notice. The current restrictions are:

Consensus required: All editors must obtain consensus on the talk page of this article before reinstating any edits that have been challenged (via reversion). If in doubt, don't make the edit.
Limit of one revert in 24 hours: This article is under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per 24-hour period).
This article and its editors are subject to Wikipedia's discretionary sanctions: All edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, are placed under discretionary sanctions. Any uninvolved administrator may levy restrictions as an arbitration enforcement action on users editing in this topic area, after an initial warning.

An administrator has applied the restriction above to this article. This is pursuant to an arbitration decision which authorized discretionary sanctions for pages relating to all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. If you breach the restriction on this page, you may be blocked or otherwise sanctioned. Please edit carefully.

EvergreenFir (talk) 22:37, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits

You need to stop adding unsourced opinions to articles in the neo-Nazi/alt-Right/far-right subject area. While much of what you post is defensible, this is a very controversial area, and it does not help to add unsupported opinion. Recall, please. that WP:OR and WP:NPOV forbid add personal opinions to articles, so that anything which is an opinion, analysis or interpretation of fact must be supported by citations from reliable sources,

From now on, please do not add anything to this subject area which is not directly supported by a citation from a reliable source, and please make sure those sources are definitively reliable. I wouldn't want to see you subject to a topic ban, but that possibility has already been broached above by an established editor, so you would be well-advised to tread carefully. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:17, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am just simply trying to add on to the subject area I take the best effort into finding reliable sources to people/groups like the alt right that have committed extremist and/or violent actions DoubleHammy (talk) 7:24, 11 July 2018 (PST)

SLOW DOWN! Please stop adding long descriptions to entries in "See also" sections, we don;t do that. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:50, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that WP:Communication is required. If you continue not to respond to comments left on your talk page, it can lead to being blocked from editing. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:06, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And I've undone the edits to Gavin McInnes. Discuss these Alt right edits or stop making them. Meters (talk) 20:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Beyond My Ken: we don't do that actually we do, see my comment below. wumbolo ^^^ 20:45, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Lauren Southern. And another Alt-right edit. Meters (talk) 20:22, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You were reverted by Bbb23 at The Rebel Media. I just wanted to elaborate that per the Manual of Style, Editors should provide a brief annotation when a link's relevance is not immediately apparent, when the meaning of the term may not be generally known, or when the term is ambiguous. wumbolo ^^^ 20:43, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The pertinent word is brief - a sentence fragment, not a full sentence or a miniparagraph. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:12, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I didn't know you could annotate See also's, briefly or otherwise, but here the real problem with the See also was that it wasn't just a neutral description, the user expressed an inappropriate opinion. In any event, the user won't be able to do it anymore as they are now sock-blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:17, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am so sorry for some of my edits. If you reinstate me to edit I promise the next time I will add more neutral descriptions.--DoubleHammy 23:17, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, Bbb23 did not block you because of your edits or their contents, they blocked you because you have used other accounts, specifically TropeWatcher, in violation of our policy on WP:Sockpuppetry. Since it was a WP:Checkuser block, it can only be undone by another checkuser, who is unlikely to do so without first getting Bbb23's approval. An ordinary admin cannot unblock you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:30, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't exactly aware of this account. Tell him that any use of this account was accidental and unintentional I was just trying to use one account. DoubleHammy, 00:32, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How can you be "not exactly aware" that you're using another account? In any case, I'm not your go-between. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:06, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, whenever I am using Wikipedia on the iPad or computer I don't know what account I am on or if I am on an account. DoubleHammy 01:07, 18 July 2018

You have to sign in, don't you? Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:18, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And on either the web or the mobile platform, you would have clearly seen the name of the account you were using at the top of your user Talk page when you visited it in response to the numerous warnings you received on this and on the TropeWatcher account. (On the web platform, it appears in the activity bar on every page in the encyclopedia.) General Ization ^Talk 02:34, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I promise from this point on I will only use one account (DoubleHammy) only and not try to use another account for the purposes of sockpuppeting. If you can kindly ask the admin to lift the ban and note that I will use the DoubleHammy account only and not any other account.DoubleHammy, 00:38 (UTC)

This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.

Please file a proper unblock request by following instructions at Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks. Alex Shih (talk) 06:12, 20 July 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

pledge never to do anymore sockpuppeting and stay on one account only DoubleHammy (talk)

Decline reason:

For several months you have been using this account to evade a block on another account. This account is not going to be unblocked to allow you to continue to avoid the block on that other account just because you say you will use only this account, without addressing the problems which led to the original block. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:56, 8 August 2018 (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.

DoubleHammy, 00:42 (UTC)

I did not sockpuppeter I was just simply wanting to stay on one account only and that was DoubleHammy (this was the account I originally used when signing up for Wikipedia). The other account was unintentional because I didn't know the password for my original account and thus couldn't log in plus the other account (L.A.Rams1) had a different email prior to the one I created.DoubleHammy 00:23 (UTC)

March 2019

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).

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

Request reason:

I have learned my lesson from the whole sockpuppeteering incident on L.A.Rams1 when I discussed last year and I promise that I am not going to change my account again and never sockpuppeteer again whatsoever. I made a bit of a mistake in regards to the accounts I had. 15:37, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You have not addressed the reason your other account was blocked, which was for "Disruptive editing; obvious antisemitism among other unacceptable biases". You'll only get one more opportunity to address that. Yamla (talk) 10:25, 6 March 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

I admit that I made mistakes with the other account for reasons you just mentioned so I promise I won't repeat these very same mistakes on this account from the previous one.

Decline reason:

You haven't specifically addressed the reasons for the block or specifically stated what you want to do if unblocked; staying away from political or other topics such as those you edited it will probably be a requirement in order to be unblocked as well. I am declining your request, you will need to use WP:UTRS if you choose to make another request. 331dot (talk) 16:28, 9 March 2019 (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.

As I warned you, I have now revoked talk page access. Another admin will be along shortly to review your request. If they decline, this leaves you with WP:UTRS. You'll want to reread WP:GAB before making a request there. You need to specifically address your sockpuppetry and disruptive editing, which have included edits showing "obvious antisemitism among other unacceptable biases". You have not properly addressed those concerns here. --Yamla (talk) 16:09, 9 March 2019 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #24248 was submitted on Mar 09, 2019 16:45:39. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 16:45, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]