User talk:GokuFan2001

October 2018

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Glitch Techs has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Glitch Techs was changed by GokuFan2001 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.954836 on 2018-10-16T22:40:57+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 22:40, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at The Girl in the Spider's Web (film), 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. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:21, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

Hello, I'm Ebyabe. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Chad Michael Murray, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. 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! Ebyabe (talk) 01:32, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019

Please stop your disruptive editing.

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

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at List of Paramount Pictures films, you may be blocked from editing. GarfieldFTW PeppaPigFTL (talk) 18:41, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at 2022 in film, 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. AJFU (talk) 22:12, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Film studios

You need to stop adding in studios to film articles if you aren’t including citations to back the edit up. It’s getting disruptive now. Rusted AutoParts 03:21, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You really need to cite what you’re adding to these articles. Unless you start doing so, please stop adding in content to these draft pages. Rusted AutoParts 02:11, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Onward (film). This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:15, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Super Bowl LVIII. There is no television contract for that yet, so any network is speculation. Tarl N. (discuss) 03:13, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Rusted AutoParts 01:51, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talk

Hoopa! No talk page edits? Please respond to the ANI thread as Wikipedia:communication is required. Thanks, Dlohcierekim (talk) 01:54, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at 2020 in film. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:26, 20 February 2019 (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 ~~~~}}. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 05:00, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Playing with Fire (2020 film). This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Still refusing to provide a reference likely means there isn't one Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:40, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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 ~~~~}}. 5 albert square (talk) 23:07, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi GokuFan2001,

I have got to admit, I am more than concerned by your edits and the fact that you do not want to seem to talk to anyone on Wikipedia. Everything on Wikipedia must be verifiable, yet, despite repeated warnings, you have continued to add unsourced content. Other editors have repeatedly tried to talk to you but they have failed to receive a response, on Wikipedia communication is key. If we do not understand what is happening, we cannot help you. You have also failed to explain your edits satisfactorily using the edit summary, therefore editors are not understanding what you are trying to do. I do not believe that another short block will make any difference - therefore I have gone for a longer block in the hope that this will make you change your ways. If you carry on with the same kind of editing behaviour upon your return, I would suggest that the next block be indefinite as it would then come across that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. Use your time out to familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's policies regarding referencing and verifiability especially the ones mentioned above.-- 5 albert square (talk) 00:24, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TheChildhoodReborn2001, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

ᴀɴᴏɴʏᴍᴜᴤᴤ ᴜᴤᴇʀ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 22:06, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

— Berean Hunter (talk) 19:35, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]