User talk:Groovey Dude

Groovey Dude, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Groovey Dude! 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 Missvain (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

September 2018

Hello, I'm Binksternet. I noticed that you made one or more changes to an article, CHQM-FM, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 19:50, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at KPLZ-FM, 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. Binksternet (talk) 04:11, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.)

KQMV (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to CHR and KPWK

KKPK (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to AC

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited KQMV, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page KPWK (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on KPPK. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Binksternet (talk) 15:20, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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, as you did at KKCW. Binksternet (talk) 00:27, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours 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 ~~~~}}. Ad Orientem (talk) 01:11, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit to KEHK

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, KEHK, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 03:16, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018

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, as you did at KXJM. Binksternet (talk) 03:48, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks 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) 01:37, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited KQMV, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CHR (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:39, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018

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. You are continuing to add significant amounts of original research to articles, even after being recently blocked twice (31 hours and a two week) for the issue. Strikerforce^Talk 19:15, 25 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) 18:08, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is your third(!) block in less than a month, for the same issues. It is also very likely your last with an expiration date. If your disruptive editing does not cease, your next block will be indefinite. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:15, 27 October 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).

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

Request reason:

I was adding more info to KKCW. Groovey Dude (talk) 01:14, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Indeed. Said information was unsourced and appeared to be original research. I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you at this time. You seem incapable of adding only adding sourced edits and you seem incapable of not adding unsupported opinion. Please relate in your own words what is meant by the following statement, "all content must be cited from reliable sources that are unconnected with the subject and have a reputation for fact checking." Please relate that to your situation and tell us how you will change your editing. Please read WP:OR, tell us what it means, and relate it to your situation. Please tell us what you will do/not do in the future. Thank you.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 02:21, 30 October 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I will make sure to cite the source. It was more info about the station and I will make sure I don't do it again. Groovey Dude (talk) 02:36, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You didn't answer the questions asked by Dlohcierekim. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:03, 30 October 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.

(Non-administrator comment) I would also point out that the issues were not just on the KKCW article, but, rather, on a number of radio station articles. In reviewing your edit history after KKCW and a couple of others popped up in my watchlist, I found an extreme amount of OR edits that required reverting. While it could be concluded that the information was correct, in some cases, there was too much gray area (i.e., your opinion may be different than mine which may be different than, for example, Dlohcierekim) involved in those conclusions to have them in an encyclopedia. Strikerforce^Talk 18:14, 31 October 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).

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

Request reason:

I will make sure that I don't add information without sources. I will add a source to KKCW's article as well as many other articles. I will also make sure I don't change OR to WP by accident.

Decline reason:

If you aren't willing to answer Dlohcierekim's questions, you are just wasting our time. Yamla (talk) 13:35, 14 November 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I will add sources to articles. I will not forget to add sources. I will not change OR to WP ever again. I will not make these mistakes again.

Decline reason:

Do not request unblocking again until you have responded to the questions above. Your block can be expanded to include this page. -- Scott (talk) 04:10, 15 November 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.

(Non-administrator comment) @Groovey Dude:, you're still not responding to the questions posed by @Dlohcierekim:. I would urge you to do so before someone chooses to make your block permanent. Strikerforce^Talk 23:41, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

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 ~~~~}}.

I have changed your block to indefinite based on your innumerable unblock requests which clearly demonstrate you lack the competenecy to edit the encyclopedia. Please see WP:CIR. Additionally your ability to edit your talk page is revoked. Any further unblock requests should be filed via the WP:UTRS system. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:23, 15 November 2018 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Groovey Dude (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #23287 was submitted on Nov 17, 2018 22:32:30. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 22:32, 17 November 2018 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Groovey Dude (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #23291 was submitted on Nov 18, 2018 06:03:14. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 06:03, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) @Ad Orientem: I have reason to believe Groovey Dude is evading a block using a new IP address, based on the type of edits being made by the IP being very similar to his and the timing of the new IP beginning to edit. Please take a look at the edit history at KKCW. Strikerforce^Talk 17:35, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That does indeed seem to be the case. I have blocked 2601:603:1301:69d0:e0a8:d001:da18:6c2 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). GD's chances of being unblocked just receded further below the horizon. Favonian (talk) 17:44, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Groovey Dude. 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]

UTRS 38240

UTRS appeal #38240 is now closed. User is banned from UTRS. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:41, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]