User talk:FrankensteinsDad

Welcome!

Hi FrankensteinsDad! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternately, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing!

March 2021

Plot descriptions cannot be copied from other sources, including official sources and IMDb, unless these can be verified to be public domain or licensed compatibly with Wikipedia. They must be written in original language to comply with Wikipedia's copyright policy. On The Lightning Express. — Diannaa (talk) 14:39, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:58, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alfonso Brescia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page War of the Robots. 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) 06:10, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but your recent edits, such as those to User talk:Sariel Xilo, appear to be intentional disruptions designed to illustrate a point. Edits designed for the deliberate purpose of drawing opposition, including making edits you do not agree with or enforcing a rule in a generally unpopular way, are highly disruptive and can lead to a block or ban. If you feel that a policy is problematic, the policy's talk page is the proper place to raise your concerns. If you simply disagree with someone's actions in an article, discuss it on the article talk page or, if direct discussion fails, through dispute resolution. If consensus strongly disagrees with you even after you have made proper efforts, then respect the consensus, rather than trying to sway it with disruptive tactics. Please stop copying and pasting discussions from other places to my talk; discussions on the issue should be on Talk:Greg Rucka. Sariel Xilo (talk) 18:21, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

After my info about Greg Rucka's son was removed from his article, I was told specifically to discuss it further on Greg Rucka's talk page. Then when I post a comment on the talk page asking for a discussion I get indefinitely BLOCKED? Good one. Why didn't you guys just tell me Greg Rucka is editing the information that goes on his page? That would've been a lot simpler. FrankensteinsDad (talk) 16:58, 24 July 2022 (UTC) FrankensteinsDad (talk) 17:05, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ---Lilach5 (לילך5) discuss 04:47, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

Due to your violations of the policy on Biographies of living people, you have been indefinitely blocked from Greg Rucka and its talk page. Please read the Guide to appealing blocks. Cullen328 (talk) 05:29, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. 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.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. 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.

Cullen328 (talk) 05:41, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

After my info about Greg Rucka's son was removed from his article, even though I provided at least ten reference sources, I was told specifically to discuss it further on Greg Rucka's talk page. Then when I post a comment on the talk page asking for a discussion I get indefinitely BLOCKED? Good one. Why didn't you guys just tell me Greg Rucka didn't want the information on his page? That would've been a lot simpler. Thanks for your impartial handling of the matter. FrankensteinsDad (talk) 16:58, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When you wrote It has everything to do with Rucka. It shows what kind of child he has raised, which says a lot about him as a father, you disqualified yourself from writing about Greg Rucka on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 17:12, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not aware of any communication from Greg Rucka about this article. I am acting to enforce WP:BLP policy. Cullen328 (talk) 17:22, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They ASKED me why it pertained to his article! If the article is about Rucka and his personal life, and he's got a son who is arrested vandalizing storefronts 3,000 miles away from where he lives, I'd say the son's arrest was a definite life-changing event in Rucka's personal life as well. That's why I put it under "Personal life" where such things are discussed in most wiki articles. Why does his article have to be kept sanitized? FrankensteinsDad (talk) 17:23, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An arrest (no conviction has been verified) of an adult son does not belong in the biography of his father. The arrest was covered by unreliable sensationalist tabloid newspapers, not by impeccably reliable sources. Have you read, studied and completely understood the essential WP:BLP policy? Your various comments make it crystal clear that your motivation is a desire to besmirch this man's reputation through guilt by association. That type of behavior simply is not allowed on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 17:37, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well I certainly have nothing against the guy, I just thought it was a very unique incident, the part about him travelling 3,000 miles to smash some innocent people's windows. The sources I listed showed actual mug shots of the kid's face as he was getting booked, so how could the sources all be unreliable? It doesn't matter what newspaper reported it, it's either true or it's not. Anyway, I'd appreciate if you'd take the block off? I promise I won't revisit the page. Sorry for causing any trouble. FrankensteinsDad (talk) 19:55, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since you show no sign of understanding and accepting WP:BLP and WP:RS policies, I will not be unblocking you. If you want another administrator to review the situation, follow the unblock request instructions at WP:GAB. Cullen328 (talk) 20:42, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why is my account blocked?

FrankensteinsDad (talk) 21:47, 14 March 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

Could someone help me please? My account has been blocked, and I did not commit any violations of wikipedia. I don't even know why I've been blocked. Can someone please help me fix this? Thanks. FrankensteinsDad (talk) 18:29, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 18:48, 18 March 2023 (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.