User talk:Ethanweinberg05

March 2019

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at C. J. Mosley (linebacker). 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. Scorbunny (talk) 03:00, 14 March 2019 (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 Wilmot Collins. 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. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 02:20, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Survivor: Edge of Extinction, 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. Scorbunny (talk) 01:18, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on The Voice (Australian TV series). This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. livelikemusic talk! 03:04, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. livelikemusic talk! 23:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June 2019

Hi. Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for working to improve the site with your edit to American Dream Meadowlands, as we really appreciate your participation. However, the edit had to be reverted, because Wikipedia cannot accept uncited material. Wikipedia requires that the material in its articles be accompanied by reliable, verifiable (usually secondary) sources explicitly cited in the article text in the form of an inline citation, which you can learn to make here. If you ever have any other questions about editing, or need help regarding the site's policies, just let me know by leaving a message for me in a new section at the bottom of my talk page. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 17:19, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Bagumba. Your recent edit to the page LeBron James appears to have added premature information about a reported sports transaction, so it has been removed for now. The transaction is based on anonymous sources and/or awaiting an official announcement. If you believe the transaction has been completed, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. —Bagumba (talk) 03:46, 28 June 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]

January 2020

Hello, I'm TheBigMan720. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Chan Gailey, 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. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. TheBigMan720 (talk) 04:28, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:00, 20 January 2020 (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).

Ethanweinberg05 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was attempting to make meaningful edits that were all true and proven. I forgot to add sourcing and I apologize for that. I think this is fucked up. Ethanweinberg05 (talk) 17:06, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

To be unblocked early, please demonstrate here on your talk page an edit that you would like to make. Include a citation to a reliable source. Then make another unblock request, pointing out your example. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:15, 20 January 2020 (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.

It is true and proven that an assistant coach on the 49ers, at the exact moment he was coaching a playoff game, suddenly became a coach for the Browns [1]? You have been warned many times about adding unsourced or incorrect content to articles, and if it happens again after this block expires your next block will be indefinite. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:26, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|reason=Can you please unblock me now and not make me wait until the morning to update pages. For instance, according to Adam Schefter, Dean Pees, who is the Titans defensive coordinator, is retiring. I can edit that and source it as needed. I don't want to harm wikipedia in any way.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:04, 20 January 2020 (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).

Ethanweinberg05 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I would like to be unblocked. I would like to edit the page of active nfl defensive coordinators, updating a few defensive coordinators of certain teams. For example, it was confirmed last week by many sites that Denver Broncos outside linebacker coach Brandon Staley was becoming the next defensive coordinator of the Los Angeles Rams. This is not updated however. The source is http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001095795/article/rams-hiring-kevin-oconnell-as-oc-staley-as-dc— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ethanweinberg05 (talk • contribs) 22:23, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As per below. Your proposed edit shows you do not understand how to edit Wikipedia. Please take the remaining time of the block to read up on what you've been told, and to read up on our policies and guidelines. Otherwise, your next block will be for substantially longer. Yamla (talk) 00:40, 21 January 2020 (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.

I fixed your unblock request for you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:40, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you made that edit to the Brandon Staley article, you would be promptly reverted. We only change coaching articles to reflect hires once the teams officially announce the moves. The source you provided uses language that suggests the hire is not yet official, see WP:RSBREAKING. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:26, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're doing the same thing again. Free agents cannot change teams until today at 4PM EDT. Eagles 24/7 (C) 12:19, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2020

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week to prevent you from persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:21, 18 March 2020 (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).

Ethanweinberg05 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I apologize, as I didn't realize changes could be made to player profiles until 4 PM. I did not see your message above, and I was just trying to be helpful. I am sorry and would like to re reinstated. I promise not to poorly source content of this matter again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ethanweinberg05 (talk • contribs) 17:13, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

There still seems to be question as to whether you understand our sourcing guidelines. One thing that would help is if you demonstrated that you can follow them, like I mentioned last time you were blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:41, 21 March 2020 (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 did you ignore my message above when I told you about this? And why do you keep adding unsourced information to articles despite being blocked for this very issue? Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:49, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If after this block expires you continue to add unsourced content to Wikipedia articles and/or attack other users, you will receive an indefinite block. Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:50, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2020 United States House of Representatives elections in Texas, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Jeff Miller and Don Bacon (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) 06:09, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Jamal Lewis (footballer), you may be blocked from editing. Mattythewhite (talk) 18:14, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please use an edit summary

Hi there! Thanks for updating photos of politicians! Can you please make sure you use an edit summary when you make your edits that aren't minor? It would save your fellow Wikipedians from having to compare diffs of the edits made. I appreciate it so much! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Missvain (talk) 23:26, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, we generally use the official portraits of officeholders to document their infoboxes unless an official portrait is not available. Thanks for your efforts and sorry to be the bearer of bad news. Feel free to bring up any concerns on the talk pages off office holders or consider improving other sections of the articles. Thanks again! Missvain (talk) 23:31, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have replaced the official photos on many articles about Democratic political figures, e.g. Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, and Patrick Leahy, with unofficial and less attractive images. Because you fail to leave edit summaries, please explain here the pattern of these edits. HouseOfChange (talk) 02:57, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The photos were more recent images and better represented the politicians today. Some pictures were from as long as 10 years ago, which isn't representative of anything.

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) 03:00, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

American politics DS alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

― Tartan357 ^Talk 15:31, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Kelly Loeffler. 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 noticeboards.
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. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. There was a note not to do exactly what you did, and you decided to delete it and go ahead. Don't do it again. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 15:32, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content.

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 ~~~~}}. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:50, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I completely understand your reasoning, so I will not edit football related articles anymore. I merely did it to help the community be more informed on up-to-date news, and when working on other sections like baseball, basketball, and politics, I will do what I need regarding sourcing. Once again, I apologize for doing anything to harm the football section, and will make efforts to improve so one day I can continue editing here.

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).

Ethanweinberg05 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I apologize for improperly sourcing content. Staley's signing with the Chargers was directly reported by the NFL, and Campbell's had been reported by Adam Schefter and Ian Rapoport. I will not make changes to a document unless there is proper sourcing in the future. I forgot to source and provide a summary of my edits, so I hope you can reconsider this indefinite ban.

Decline reason:

Proper sourcing with football personnel related articles has been a habitual problem for you and you haven't demonstrated any improvement in that area. I suspect you will only be unblocked if you agree to not make football related edits for at least 6 months and tell us what it is you will edit about instead. You will need to show us that you can comply with sourcing guidelines properly. Other admins may disagree, but that's how I see it. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 09:57, 18 January 2021 (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.

indefinitely from editing for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content.

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 ~~~~}}. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:50, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I completely understand your reasoning, so I will not edit football related articles anymore. I merely did it to help the community be more informed on up-to-date news, and when working on other sections like baseball, basketball, and politics, I will do what I need regarding sourcing. Once again, I apologize for doing anything to harm the football section, and will make efforts to improve so one day I can continue editing here.