User talk:Fghsfijgig

Welcome!

Hello, Fghsfijgig! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can 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 by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message. (talk to me) (contributions) @ 21:12, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community (The Signpost)
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Phorusrhacidae. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Mr Fink (talk) 00:58, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 2015

Hi there! 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)

I noticed your recent edit to Tom and Jerry Tales does not have an edit summary. Diff: [1]

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. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:31, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at The Good Dinosaur. --Mr Fink (talk) 03:07, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 2016

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to It (novel). Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 01:16, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Two problems. Wikia is not a reliable source. And citations belong in the article, not the edit summary. Sundayclose (talk) 01:56, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Fghsfijgig. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

January 2017

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to An American Tail, but we cannot accept original research. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. and at Happy New Year, Charlie Brown! JesseRafe (talk) 17:20, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Dumbo, without citing a reliable source using an inline citation that clearly supports the material. The burden is on the person wishing to keep in the material to meet these requirements, as a necessary (but not always sufficient) condition. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. McDoob AU93 16:13, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tom and Jerry Tales, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page African. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:13, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

June 2017

Please do not add or change content, as you did at It (novel), 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. Scr★pIron^IV 14:21, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use talk pages for inappropriate discussion, as you did at Talk:Tom and Jerry: Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, you may be blocked from editing. --Mr Fink (talk) 00:47, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Stand by Me (film). Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 13:34, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Get Rid of Annoying Fanboy Giving Cocamame Info

Anyone know how I can block this jerk: 50.26.54.54? Fghsfijgig (talk) 03:03, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Three tips:

Please don't call people jerks. We don't tolerate personal attacks at Wikipedia.
Opening a discussion about someone on your own talk page isn't likely to result in a response. I just happened to notice your comment because your talk page was automatically added to my watchlist when I left you a note in 2015.
If you have a specific complaint about a user, if it is unequivocally vandalism, report it at WP:AIV. If it is a behavioral issue that is not vandalism, take it to WP:ANI. Frankly, if you're talking about stuff like this and this, your best bet is to discuss it with them directly, since this is a content issue, not a behavioral one. If they refuse to discuss over time, you can elevate it to the Administrator's noticeboard (ANI). But from what I see, they're making changes to largely interpretive content, so trying to assert your own version of the interpretive content isn't going to work out well and your repeated reverts could wind up with you being sanctioned if you're not acting in good faith to discuss with the other user. We do, after all, have an edit-warring policy.
"Cockamamie", for what it's worth.

Good luck, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:56, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE Help Me Out With this Guy!

Look I don't want to start nothing, but could you PLEASE block (or send a warning to) user 50.26.54.54?! He's a vandal I'm telling you. He keeps adding false information to the "Family Guy" character and episode pages that I know (for a fact) or false and slightly exaggerated because I watch the show and I've seen all the episodes: Both Meg AND Chris are unpopular at school. Chris was only more socially active than Meg until the sixth season (with the exception of dating) when he was no longer seen with friends until the 13th season when he made friends with Neil Goldman (who is currently now his ONLY friend). Before these later seasons, Chris was mostly a bully to Meg like most of the family. It only JUST got better between the two. Any episodes where Chris became popular at school only lasted episode-wise. I keep telling 50.26.54.54 to stop, but he won't cut it out and I TRIED polite the first couple of times. I'm telling you: He's rabble-rousing! Every time I try to undo his spamming, he puts it right back! Please make him stop. Thank you

The Chris Griffin article is a mess. Most of that in-universe interpretive content could be cut. Same with all of the rehashing of plot points like, "However, when Peter and Lois were having a fist fight, Chris cheered for Peter, telling him to 'kick her ass!'" and "In Stew-Roids, Chris gains newfound popularity when the school's queen bee Connie D'Amico dates Chris", etc. The point of a character article is not to replace the experience of watching the series just by repeating one-off events and jokes. The focus of an article should be on things like how the character was cast, who the inspiration was, what critics thing of the character, what the societal impact of the character has been, etc. In my estimation, the entire article is a fancruft magnet and most of it could /should be condensed and relocated to List of Family Guy characters. My point is, there's no real need to get emotional about that content, because it's not great content. As for your issues with the other editor, I don't see where you've attempted to discuss anything with them. As for the vandalism issue, you haven't show me any instances of the user vandalising anything. We typically demonstrate that by copy/pasting "diffs" into discussions. See WP:DIFF. Diffs, shortly explained, are links to "differences" between one version of an article and another. Like here, where we can see you've reverted some of that editor's changes. If you can show me diffs of the user vandalizing, then I can do something about it. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:53, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Fghsfijgig. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to The Pebbles and Bamm-Bamm Show. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. – Carbrera (talk) 02:22, 25 January 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at It (2017 film), you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. ChamithN (talk) 19:31, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2018

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you may be blocked from editing. Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:59, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WHAT disruptive edits, Nimrod??!!!! What I put is true and the real deal dummy🤨

It is disruptive to insert your personal opinions/commentary into articles (especially when previously warned not to do so), and blatant name-calling like that is completely unwarranted as well as inappropriate per WP:Civility and WP:No personal attacks. Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:39, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article. You seriously need to desist from adding your own opinions into articles and have no excuse for doing so after multiple previous warnings on the matter. Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:19, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn’t personal analysis or commentary. Still I don’t know how it came out like that. I was trying to list my sources without that other stuff coming up.

Inserting things like "more reasonable" into articles most certainly IS quite clearly your personal commentary. Don't pretend like you don't know that. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:44, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh right. I thought you were talking about my edits on Chris Griffin.

Disambiguation link notification for June 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Doug characters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fred Newman (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) 09:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. JNW (talk) 21:36, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Which one in particular?— Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Fghsfijgig (talk • contribs) 03:36, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@JNW: A question is being addressed to you in good faith. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 20:53, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Just saw this, Mr. Guye. Pretty much all the additions to plot descriptions, which are unevenly written, favor run-on sentences, and aren't encyclopedic in general. The latest is a good example [2]. That's adding original research just because the editor can, and since it's not vandalism, it tends to stick to articles and weigh them under an accretion of unnecessary detail. JNW (talk) 20:05, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry then and whatever

The Meg

Hi there, I was just wondering why in [this edit] to The Meg, you capitalized the first letter of most instances of the word Megalodon. Thanks! (Please ping or message me on my talk page). Nikolaiho^☎️📖 16:36, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because Megalodon isn’t just some ordinary modern original like today’s great white. It’s its own famous prehistoric genus of a legendary primeval powerhouse. Therefore, its name should be capitalized like those of Tyrannosaurus or Stegosaurus. So my answer, because it should be capitalized.

Thanks for the response. My concern is that although it is quite an amazing creature, proper English grammar use would be to not capitalize it, as the word megalodon is not a proper noun. Nikolaiho^☎️📖 05:04, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September

Your response in July was "Sorry then and whatever." So:

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article. JNW (talk) 19:31, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. JNW (talk) 04:57, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 2018

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week 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 ~~~~}}. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:59, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October, and more of same

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article. JNW (talk) 04:13, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Later this week we'll take a trip to ANI, where I'll request a permanent block. JNW (talk) 04:13, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at The Penguins of Madagascar, you may be blocked from editing. AussieLegend (✉) 04:40, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Family Guy (season 17) has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. AussieLegend (✉) 14:36, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You should consider this to be your final warning. --AussieLegend (✉) 14:37, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 ~~~~}}. -- ferret (talk) 14:46, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Fghsfijgig. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

Hello, I'm Sandrobost. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to It – Chapter Two have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. Sandrobost (talk) 22:09, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was just fixing what seemed to be spelling mistakes.

I hope I didn't make a mistake. I believe "lef" is not a word. Sandrobost (talk) 22:57, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ANI, again

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. JNW (talk) 01:04, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

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 ~~~~}}. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:24, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Does anybody know how I can delete my Wikipedia account?