User talk:Great Great Grandson

Category:Boycotts of television has been nominated for discussion

Category:Boycotts of television, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. wumbolo ^^^ 21:09, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page March for Our Lives Albany has been reverted.
Your edit here to March for Our Lives Albany was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.facebook.com/events/176949503033619/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 01:10, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great Great Grandson, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Great Great Grandson! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like I JethroBT (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:06, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Copyright problem on Barnaul

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; however, please remember the essential rule of respecting copyrights. Edits to Wikipedia, such as your edit to the page Barnaul, may not contain material from copyrighted sources unless used with permission. It is almost never okay to copy extensive text out of a book or website and paste it into a Wikipedia article with little or no alteration, though you can clearly and briefly quote copyrighted text in the right circumstances. Content that does not comply with this legal rule must be removed. For more information on this, see:

If you still have questions, there is a new contributor's help page, or you can click here to ask a question on your talk page and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia:

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:08, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

Your addition to Barnaul 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 violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:25, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Gareth Rhodes

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.

A tag has been placed on Gareth Rhodes requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "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 deleted 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. reddogsix (talk) 03:23, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Gareth Rhodes for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gareth Rhodes 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/Gareth Rhodes 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. reddogsix (talk) 13:58, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Brazilian Science Protests for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brazilian Science Protests 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/Brazilian Science Protests 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. Rhinopias (talk) 22:34, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Complete human garbage

Hello Great Great Grandson,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Complete human garbage for deletion, because it seems to be vandalism or a hoax.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

GMG ^talk 13:22, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great Great Grandson, if you create another page like this you will be blocked from editing. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:36, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Edgar181: are you referring to the page being a hoax or to the continuous creation of bad articles? GGG created an article failing WP:LISTN an hour after your notice. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) wumbolo ^^^ 15:53, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great Great Grandson created Complete human garbage as a redirect to a biography of a living person. My comment was a reference to this clear violation of Wikipedia's WP:BLP policy and such behavior will not be tolerated here. Creation of the other articles, though potentially inappropriate for Wikipedia, are not in my opinion grounds for being blocked. Sorry that I was unclear. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:02, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of protests in Albany, New York

The article List of protests in Albany, New York has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The focus of this list is too small to be useful or encyclopedic.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:49, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Protests in Schenectady, New York

The article Protests in Schenectady, New York has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is just an attempt at a collection of all protests ever to have happened in this town. That is not an encyclopedic topic; some of it may find its way into the main article for the city, but a school walkout, no.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Drmies (talk) 02:10, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of protests in Albany, New York for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of protests in Albany, New York 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/List of protests in Albany, New York 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. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:39, 18 April 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

There was no consensus on the sockpuppet investigation page, and I was never given a chance to voice my defense

Decline reason:

On the sockpuppet investigation page, a checkuser determined that your accounts were technically related to several other Wikipedia accounts, and as a result of that, this block is here to prevent further abuse of multiple accounts. In order for your unblock request to be successful, you will need to explain why this block is no longer necessary to prevent disruption to Wikipedia—see Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks. Mz7 (talk) 22:05, 18 April 2018 (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.