User talk:Getrwuegyweh

May 2014

Hello, I'm JaconaFrere. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Martín Demichelis because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Jacona (talk) 11:46, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox dates

Hi, when updating club stats in the infobox you should update the |pcupdate= or |club-update= parameter by adding five tildes (~~~~~), which generates the specific time the update was made. Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 16:52, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright images

Please do not add images to articles unless you have worked out the legal status for the images. You appear to have added at least three images with incorrect or fake licenses. Please note that future copyright problems that are obvious like this will likely lead to a block. Kuru (talk) 00:45, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Getrwuegyweh, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! Dai Pritchard (talk) 22:46, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of James Horsfield

The article James Horsfield has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NFOOTY and WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ArsenalFan700 (talk) 18:06, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Shay Facey

The article Shay Facey has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NFOOTY and WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ArsenalFan700 (talk) 18:07, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Thierry Ambrose

The article Thierry Ambrose has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NFOOTY and WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ArsenalFan700 (talk) 18:08, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Ashley Smith-Brown

The article Ashley Smith-Brown has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NFOOTY and WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ArsenalFan700 (talk) 18:09, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Thierry Ambrose.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Thierry Ambrose.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free file with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria. If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the file can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the {{Non-free fair use}} tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the file. If the file has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:06, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Thierry Ambrose for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Thierry Ambrose is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thierry Ambrose until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ArsenalFan700 (talk) 22:38, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Manchester City F.C. Reserves and Academy

added links pointing to David Brooks, Tom Holland and James Hardy

Brittany Snow

added a link pointing to Full Circle

Family Guy: The Quest for Stuff

added a link pointing to Alien

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Errors on 23 January

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Celebrity Big Brother 15 page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of William billiam writh

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on William billiam writh requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Rider ranger47 ^Talk 15:35, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of best-selling video games, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Android. 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) 09:00, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Romelu Lukaku, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Everton. 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) 08:56, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilinking

Hi, when you add wikilinks please make sure they are to the correct article. On Mario Balotelli you linked to the city of Liverpool (Liverpool) instead of the football club Liverpool F.C.). You have to link to the correct places you can not just place brackets around the names. QED237 (talk) 23:23, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have a lot notifications about wrong links so might I suggest you start linking properly to correct pages. Also NEVER copy content directly from source to a page. QED237 (talk) 23:34, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

February 2015

Your addition to Mario Balotelli has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without 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 text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions 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 violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. You can not copy directly from source QED237 (talk) 23:32, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Transfermarkt

Since most of its content is user-generated, transfermarkt is not considered a reliable source. Please do not cite it in articles, as you did with George Evans (footballer, born 1994). Thank you. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:45, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

February 2015

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at 2014–15 Manchester City F.C. season. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. 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, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. QED237 (talk) 21:17, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at 2014–15 Manchester City F.C. season. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. 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, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. QED237 (talk) 21:19, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Live updates

Hi,

Live updates are not allowed per consensus. Please read current info at Template:Livescores editnotice used on several pages and the discussions linked there. It ahs been discussed several times, so please wait until match has finished before updating stats. QED237 (talk) 21:23, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please read this discussion and this discussion and stop before being blocked. QED237 (talk) 21:26, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

February 2015

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2014–15 Manchester City F.C. season. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount and can lead to a block, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. QED237 (talk) 21:24, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Johnson

What do you think you are doing? The word "rape" appears nowhere in the headline or the body of the article that you have cited. Any more stunts like that, and I'll block you for serious WP:BLP violations. Bencherlite ^Talk 22:03, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for contravening Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy, as you did at Adam Johnson (footballer). 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. Bencherlite ^Talk 22:19, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I warned you, and you did it again, so I've blocked you. Note to any reviewing admin: check Getrwuegyweh's rev-deleted diffs and see how Getrwuegyweh changes the title of one of the references in a BLP-infringing way. Bencherlite ^Talk 22:22, 2 March 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

MY contribution was 100% true and you're just being a bellend. He was arrested for a sexual offence with a 15 year old girl; which comes under statutory rape. Actually learn something before you dish out blocks to peopleGetrwuegyweh (talk) 23:05, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You're lucky to be getting away with only a 24 hour block. If you keep making BLP-infringing edits and doctoring citation titles, we will not be so lenient. —Dark 00:13, 3 March 2015 (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.

Your recent editing history at Katie Hopkins shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. 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.

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. QED237 (talk) 23:10, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As an example. Where is source for the "Sunday night" show/program. It has not been mentioned anywhere in article and is not sourced. QED237 (talk) 23:13, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright issues

As promised in my previous warning, I have blocked you for fake licenses on images. No, taking a copyrighted image and editing out the background or other trivial editorial changes does not enable you to take ownership of the image and release it to the public domain. Kuru (talk) 19:11, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

unblock me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Getrwuegyweh (talk • contribs)

I appreciate minimalism as much as anyone, but you may want to address the problematic behavior that necessitated the block. Kuru (talk) 21:22, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

come on! unblock me.... i can promise to never upload another picture

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).

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

Request reason:

I didn't know that changing a picture was still copyright... in future, if you could unblock me, i would NEVER upload another picture to make sure i do not make this same mistake.

Decline reason:

Based on the other problems here on your talk page, I don't think unblocking you will provide any net gain to this project. only (talk) 20:14, 3 May 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

Can't someone just put a certain block for me being unable to upload pictures but i am still allowed to edit pages? Please, i can't stress enough that i WILL NEVER upload another picture to this site if i'm unbanned

Decline reason:

See below. Huon (talk) 00:08, 10 May 2015 (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.

A selective block is not allowed by the software here. Please tell us here your interpretation of Wikipedia copyright policy. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 20:05, 9 May 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

Can't someone just put a certain block for me being unable to upload pictures but i am still allowed to edit pages? Please, i can't stress enough that i WILL NEVER upload another picture to this site if i'm unbanned

Decline reason:

You seem to have a history of faking things: Faking sources' titles, faking image licenses, faking spouses. I see no indication that it's a problem that would be resolved merely by restricting you from uploading images. Huon (talk) 00:08, 10 May 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

You say I faked source titles and fakes spouses? NEVER. I only ever edited one spouse which was Steve Glover and Stacy Soloman which is 100% true. And source titles are 100% correct too!

Decline reason:

Because you're outright denying the obvious and otherwise not requesting an unblock in a constructive manner, I've revoked your right to edit this page. Max Semenik (talk) 22:22, 11 May 2015 (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.