User talk:Jaydenstyy
User talk
Welcome!
[edit]
Welcome Jaydenstyy!
I'm Daveout, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.
| Some pages of helpful information to get you started: | Some common sense Dos and Don'ts:
|
| If you need further help, you can: | or you can: | or even: |
Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type {{helpme}} here on your talk page and someone will try to help.
There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:
|
|
To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own personal sandbox for use any time. It's perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}} on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.
Please remember to:
- Always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the
button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes ~~~~at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to your talk page, and a timestamp. - Leave descriptive edit summaries for your edits. Doing so helps other editors understand what changes you have made and why you made them.
Sincerely, - Daveout(talk) 10:01, 2 January 2022 (UTC) (Leave me a message)
October 2021
[edit]
Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. PedigreeWWEFigz87V2 (talk) 13:03, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
January 2022
[edit]
Hello, I'm Bagumba. Your recent edit to the page Denzel Valentine appears to have added premature information about a reported sports transaction, so it has been removed for now. The transaction is based on anonymous sources and/or awaiting an official announcement. If you believe the transaction has been completed, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. 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. —Bagumba (talk) 02:27, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Orlin Home
[edit]Hello, the page you were working on (Orlin Home) has been deleted because it didn't met the minimum WP:Notability standards. - Daveout(talk) 10:04, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
January 2022 (part II)
[edit]
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to New Orleans Pelicans, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Yosemiter (talk) 03:52, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Please use edit summaries
[edit] Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.
When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits a summary may be quite brief.
Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → 
Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary.
Thanks! — Manticore 21:46, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
February 2022
[edit] Please do not add or change content, as you did at CJ McCollum, 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. —Bagumba (talk) 00:33, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:WikiProject Sports/Handling sports transactions. Natg 19 (talk) 01:02, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
NBA roster templates
[edit]The players are in alphabetical order on these. If you want to update them after transactions, please do it correctly. Thanks Rikster2 (talk) 08:43, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
- Again - put players in alpha order when you update rosters. Otherwise just let somebody else do it Rikster2 (talk) 13:41, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
The article Alex Abrahantes has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. WhoAteMyButter (📨talk│📝contribs) 04:18, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Mike Bell (animator) moved to draftspace
[edit]An article you recently created, Mike Bell (animator), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. signed, 511KeV (talk) 08:34, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Mike Bell (animator) moved to draftspace
[edit]An article you recently created, Mike Bell (animator), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CUPIDICAE💕 16:24, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Warning
[edit]
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
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.
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.
- Please stop creating articles directly in mainspace until you have an adequate understanding of our WP:BLP policy. Several of your creations are not only promotional, but poorly sourced or outright unsourced. CUPIDICAE💕 16:43, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Raymond Aguilar moved to draftspace
[edit]An article you recently created, Raymond Aguilar, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Engr. Smitty Werben 14:38, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
March 2022
[edit]
Thank you for your recent contributions, such as Raymond Aguilar. Getting started creating new articles on Wikipedia can be tricky, and you might like to try creating a draft of your article in draftspace or in your userspace first, which you can then ask for feedback on if necessary, with less risk of deletion. Do make sure you also read help available to you, including Your First Article and the Tutorial. You might also like to try the Article Wizard, which has an option to create a draft version. Do not re-move to article namespace. Submit it through AFC. Engr. Smitty Werben 15:06, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
Welcome!
[edit]
Welcome!
Hello, Jaydenstyy, and welcome to Wikipedia! I have noticed that you are fairly new! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. I also see that some of your recent edits, such as the ones to the page James Harden, show an interest in the use of images and/or photos on Wikipedia.
Did you know that ...
- ...Wikipedia has a very stringent image use policy?
- ...most images from Flickr, online news websites, and other web sources are copyrighted?
- ...Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously?
- ...freely-licensed images should be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, a central location for images where they can be used on all Wikipedia projects?
- ...we recommend that new users use our "files for upload" process – at least until you get the hang of things?
If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{Help me}} on your talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- Manual of Style
Adding content
[edit]When adding content, like you did for Nope (film), DON'T copy-and-paste the article you're citing. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 02:03, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Ways to improve Raymond Aguilar
[edit]Hello, Jaydenstyy,
Thank you for creating Raymond Aguilar.
I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:
You have moved this out of draft to mainspace.
What is needed are references from significant coverage about this player, and not their own words; in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS; that is your guide. Lists, Team rosters, pages listing matches and results, databases, Instagram, Soccerway, Facebook, none of these are reliable sources. (There have been changes to the notability guide for sports - see WP:NSPORT ) You may also read WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources. A more comprehensive guide is WP:SOURCES ... Providing sufficient references, ideally giving more information about this player, that meet these criteria is likely to allow this article to remain. Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that this article may be deleted. Kindly do the needful.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Whiteguru}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Whiteguru (talk) 09:52, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
The article Owen Dennis has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:55, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
If this was the first article that you 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.
The page Owen Dennis has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appeared to be a direct copy from http://rjfp.ase.ro/wp-content/how-to-wye/archive.php?id=owen-dennis-twitter-226b0b - not compatibly licensed. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition has been be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.
Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion Review. — Diannaa (talk) 12:16, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
June 2022
[edit]
Hello, I'm Yeeno. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Mat Dickie, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. 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! Yeeno (talk) 03:10, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
July 2022
[edit]
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Carolyn Lawrence, you may be blocked from editing. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:09, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
August 2022
[edit] Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! InvadingInvader (talk) 00:58, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Madelyn Grace moved to draftspace
[edit]An article you recently created, Madelyn Grace, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. PRAXIDICAE🌈 01:39, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Madelyn Grace (August 7)
[edit]
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Madelyn Grace and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
|
Hello, Jaydenstyy!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! KylieTastic (talk) 16:44, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
|
Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution
[edit] Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from J. G. Quintel into Owen Dennis. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. If you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 13:34, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
Final Warning
[edit]You've been here nearly 1 year, edited dozens of times, and been warned frequently. Do not remove content like you did on J. G. Quintel and do not use unreliable sources such as Wikia. EvergreenFir (talk) 17:11, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
- Further, stop creating poorly sourced and unsourced BLPs in mainspace. Consider this an absolute final warning too. PRAXIDICAE🌈 20:53, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- so you decided to restore the article after this warning? Guess this is going to ANI. PRAXIDICAE🌈 21:25, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
Fred Osmond moved to draftspace
[edit]An article you recently created, Fred Osmond, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. UricdivineTalkToMe 19:23, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
ANI
[edit]
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. PRAXIDICAE🌈 21:33, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Considering the ANI request that is open, I would strongly advise you against editing any BLPs right now. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:15, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
All right Jaydenstyy (talk) 17:15, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- You keep saying that and then doing the opposite - so let me make it clearer: you are going to wind up either indefinitely blocked or outright blocked from editing articles in mainspace if you continue. You have demonstrated repeatedly and without fail that you do not understand our sourcing policy as it pertains to WP:BLP or anything else. I really strongly advise you to start engaging with the editors who have left complaints on your talk page before you edit in mainspace again, and read our policies. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:18, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Just calm down I’m not trying to hurt you or anyone Jaydenstyy (talk) 17:55, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- Don't tell people to calm down when you are completely in the wrong. This really just furthers the need for you to be blocked. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:57, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
And how long can I stop editing Wikipedia articles Jaydenstyy (talk) 18:08, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
August 2022
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. --Blablubbs (talk) 18:49, 16 August 2022 (UTC)- I'm sorry to do this, because I'm certain that you are here with the best of intentions, but I'm afraid your long history of problematic edits (specifically ones that conflict with our policies on verifiability, reliable sources, copyright and wp:biographies of living people) despite numerous warnings (including a final one from EvergreenFir about a week ago) leave me without any better options. Should you choose to appeal this block now or at some point down the road (speaking with my admin hat off, I would encourage you to wait some time before doing so), please carefully read the policies I linked above first and make sure that your request clearly demonstrates that you have understood how to avoid running afoul of them in the future. --Blablubbs (talk) 19:07, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- I am sorry I didn't get to you soon enough. Please still read what I offered to you and take Blablubbs and others comments into consideration should you appeal the block at some point. You will need to show that you understand where you went wrong against policy and how you plan to not allow that to happen again. One important aspect is the ability to take on criticism and understand that even criticism that is meant as negative can be used to affect positive change. I hope you will appeal when the time is right and I hope you will be more successful at following advice and staying within the guidelines at that time. If you are able to get an appeal and you need additional support or advice then please do return to my talk page or seek assistance at the Teahouse. --ARoseWolf 20:13, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
Jaydenstyy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
So my reason to be unblocked is that well most of the articles I was working on never was very possible to find a published reliable source, and the material therefore may not be verifiable and the reason why is that because the articles on Fred Osmond and Raymond Aguilar I tried so much of trying to find a reliable source but I just couldn’t most of them didn’t tell me much at all and I couldn’t give much information about them also with Abrahantes there were sources but y’all said those ones didn’t work and it’s okay I have also have read the articles you told me to read about and I have started to get used to them know and that i will try to not get blocked again because now I have learned about it now and the others I didn’t know about how very much you guys are strict about copyright and reliable sources but it’s okay and I will never ever try to do that again and that my appeal.Jaydenstyy (talk) 14:38, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Your comments on this page demonstrate why the block was necessary, and why it needs to continue. I strongly advise you to take the advice you are being given and wait some time before making another request. If you make one soon, and/or it reflects the poor attitude your last comment demonstrates, you may lose access to this page. 331dot (talk) 18:45, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
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.
"I would encourage you to wait some time before doing so"
,"I hope you will appeal when the time is right"
- Jaydenstyy, the suggestion to give it some time was a good suggestion. This request is too soon. --ARoseWolf 17:22, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Okay so on Wikipedia I was blocked right so I send the request but they say should have just waited for it like why should if I use the app all the time I don’t want to wait freaking five months for something small like that especially when school is coming for me that makes it stupid Jaydenstyy (talk) 17:31, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- You are still able to read Wikipedia. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:34, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
And don’t say I didn’t wait some time I did some hours Jaydenstyy (talk) 17:31, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Praxidicae ik that i could I just can’t edit anything Jaydenstyy (talk) 17:36, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Yes because you have repeatedly shown you are incapable of collaborating, communicating and editing within our policies. I would oppose any unblock at this time and I am sure others will to, which is why you're being encouraged not to appeal until a later date, several months out. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:38, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Like y’all never gave me a time to upload about the appeal but y’all sit here saying “don’t upload at this time upload at a later f out of here like why does Wikipedia mods act like this I thought y’all would act a bit less crappy and also why do you guys think who is a big corporation or a person would care that if I was making an article on them because they probably wouldn’t know what Wikipedia is Jaydenstyy (talk) 17:42, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- The fact that you still can not see the issues means you need way more time. I have the ability to edit and yet I spend 75% of my time reading. I may comment on a discussion here or there but I spend a lot of time reading and being selective in my edits for now. Why? Because there is a lot of invaluable information to gain and process from watching and reading more experienced editors here. Also, Wikipedia policies and guidelines can be very hard to understand in context of consensus. I may see a policy a certain way but consensus may not. It's okay to voice my perspective in discussion and it may even be acceptable per WP:BOLD to edit based on my perception but once it is brought to my attention that I am editing against consensus or my view of policy is contested then I am to acknowledge that and either begin discussion or accept it and move on. My life is not dictated by something written or omitted in Wikipedia. This is just an encyclopedia and we are here to collaborate to improve it, not harm it. --ARoseWolf 15:00, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Jaydenstyy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
So my reason to be unblocked is that well most of the articles I was working on never was very possible to find a published reliable source, and the material therefore may not be verifiable and the reason why is that because the articles on Fred Osmond and Raymond Aguilar I tried so much of trying to find a reliable source but I just couldn’t most of them didn’t tell me much at all and I couldn’t give much information about them also with Abrahantes there were sources but y’all said those ones didn’t work and it’s okay I have also have read the articles you told me to read about and I have started to get used to them know and that i will try to not get blocked again because now I have learned about it now and the others I didn’t know about how very much you guys are strict about copyright and reliable sources but it’s okay and I will never ever try to do that again and that my appeal. Jaydenstyy (talk) 2:49 pm, Today (UTC−4)
Decline reason:
I'm afraid this is exactly what you wrote in the one just declined. I'm more afraid that this shows you are clearly not ready to return to editing. When we say, "some time," we mean months-- not hours. There are many problems with your editing, and you have been told about these problems more than once. You will need to clearly show that these problems will not recur.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:10, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
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.
Okay I’m not wating a month Jaydenstyy (talk) 20:31, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- I understand your frustration at being blocked and desire to continue contributing. However, I have just indefinitely blocked what appears to be a sockpuppet you created (User:Can't make me wait) based on behavioral evidence (account created after you saying you are not willing to wait a month and whose only mainspace edit was to restore an edit that you had previously made and that was reverted). If you choose to continue creating sockpuppets or seeking to evade your block it is highly likely you will wind up banned with little chance of regaining editing privileges for years (if ever) and an almost certainty of any edits you make in contravention of said ban being reverted on sight (even if they may otherwise be productive). I know it will likely be difficult, however I would strongly encourage you to take some time (i.e. a few months) away (making no edits on any account or IP whatsoever), pursue other interests, and, in a few months, if you are interested in returning, re-read our policies thoroughly and post a further appeal. Best wishes, Mifter (talk) 07:59, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- What are you doing, Jay? Stop this. Don't Sockpuppet. I implore you to follow guidance here and step away for a while (a few months) and then come back and do what @Mifter and others, including myself, have told you. Read, read, read. Once you clearly understand policies and where you went afoul of them only then should you ask for an appeal. Please do this. --ARoseWolf 15:09, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Also I didn’t sock puppet it was probably my brother making an account here Jaydenstyy (talk) 15:12, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Okay so it’s September so I have a question should I wait till October to make an appeal or this month Jaydenstyy (talk) 17:49, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Mike Bell (animator)
[edit] Hello, Jaydenstyy. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Mike Bell (animator), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:02, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Mike Bell (animator)
[edit]
Hello, Jaydenstyy. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Mike Bell".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 16:31, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
It’s been two months
[edit]Jaydenstyy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
So my reason to be unblocked is that well I feel like that I have read all the rules to Wikipedia and think I have improved on it for some time and I’m very deeply sorry about what I was doing messing up articles left and right and it will not happen again also the reason the articles I made didn’t have much source’s around was because like for instance people like Raymond Aguilar and Fred Osmond, etc… I couldn’t find anything about them except those wiki pages now if you guys have found any then pls notify me about them and will use them on those types of articles I’m am going to take high regard and news about this and what I have been doing and I’m going to be a better wiki editor from now on.Jaydenstyy (talk) 15:22, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Closing this request as a new one has been opened below. SQLQuery Me! 15:39, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
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.
Jaydenstyy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
So I know that I got blocked due to not giving our sources and stuff and I’ve learned all right I just wanted to do pages her again and ik it’s bad and I shouldn’t do stuff like this but I’m sorry for the stuff I’ve done even tho it’s not that bad I know I didn’t source my articles but half of them was hard to find because the unreliable sources y’all say are that were majority the ones that said it the most at all the whole time and I know this website is that but look I get it and I’m sorry but I’m sorry and I understand that I did wrong and I did my lessonJaydenstyy (talk) 03:58, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This is all one long, stream-of-consciousness run-on sentence. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:26, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
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.
- Jaydenstyy, you should only have one open unblock request. If you make too many unblock request, your talk page access will ultimately be removed. You need to only have one open request and be patient. An administrator will consider your request and get to it. Liz Read! Talk! 06:27, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
All right I’m sorry Jaydenstyy (talk) 12:35, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
- What's your connection to MostReliableSourceAccordingToWikpedia (talk · contribs)?—SpacemanSpiff 01:08, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:33, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
It’s been something and I’ve think I finally should be unblocked
[edit]Jaydenstyy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have been learning more and more about the rules to Wikipedia and I have finally stopped and learned everything I needed for Wikipedia and now know that I should credit good sources or spend less time on it entirely so I can continue to use the app more frequently a lot and have changed since then and feel that I am sry for what I did in the past and should change that and be better for now on and I am deeply sorry for everything.Jaydenstyy (talk) 02:33, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Nothing here demonstrates what you now understand about WP:RS and WP:BLP that you didn't understand before. I'm also worried, like NinjaRobotPirate, that your unblock requests are typically one long run-on sentence. I'm afraid I'm not convinced you have sufficient competence to communicate here. Yamla (talk) 11:59, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
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.
I think it’s about time
[edit]Jaydenstyy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Look I know it feels as if I don’t know anything about it but I do and remember I’m young and you guys saying you should still have “competence” and saying that it’s a requirement. I know that I have to tell you guys that I’ve learned about the wp:RS and the wp:BLP and I have don’t think just because I don’t say it in the unblock request doesn’t mean I’m not doing it while you guys are talking to me about it that just means I’m trying more and more to change. I have also heard you guys say I lack sufficient competence but really I just don’t simply know how to have it to edit the articles here. I know you have to read about them to get it and I understand generally. Also I’ve heard about what I do wrong with reliable sources I get that I have to source them correctly on here and I know that if I don’t they can delete it right away but sometimes if they is no official sources around sometimes, then I can’t use sources. For example, The Raymond Aguilar article, the reason I couldn’t sources right is truthfully because that sources where there but there were not enough to help out the article, it’s not the reason I simply didn’t care it’s because I couldn’t exactly find everything. Jaydenstyy (talk) 13:25, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Closing as stale only, you may make a new request. 331dot (talk) 09:32, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
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.
Concern regarding Draft:Madelyn Grace
[edit] Hello, Jaydenstyy. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Madelyn Grace, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:02, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Madelyn Grace
[edit]Hello, Jaydenstyy. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Madelyn Grace".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 17:05, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Raymond Aguilar
[edit] Hello, Jaydenstyy. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Raymond Aguilar, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
I wish to be unblocked soon.
[edit]Jaydenstyy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have listened to rules of the place more and have saw what it is and have changed. I have learned about the verifiably and carefully sourcing the articles completely. I am sorry that I have not been able to learn more about the website a bit more better and throughly better and could try to see where I was wrong when working on Wikipedia. I seen that I was wrong what was doing an think that I should change it indefinitely. I’m am definitely sorry 😢 but I am sorry for whatever happened that I did.
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
- the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
- the block is no longer necessary because you
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Aoidh (talk) 22:06, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
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.
Jaydenstyy (talk) 02:13, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Fred Osmond
[edit] Hello, Jaydenstyy. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Fred Osmond, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 07:01, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Fred Osmond
[edit]Hello, Jaydenstyy. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Fred Osmond".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 06:37, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
I’m sorry for messing up WP:V and WP:BLP
[edit]Jaydenstyy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I am deeply sorry for messing up Biographies of Living Persons and Verfication. The ones I had add those into I was trying to change it but the moderators already had removed them so it was too late to change them. I didn't mean have any disturbance or damage to Wikipedia and was simply trying to fix the Wiki even more and will try to make my contributions useful to the Wiki's even further and didn’t improve afterwards. I will try my very hardest to improve a lot more and am deeply sorry for the havoc I've caused. Jaydenstyy (talk) 16:01, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Decline per the user's response below. Wikipedia is not therapy and users have to demonstrate that they are compitent enough to edit the site. Z1720 (talk) 01:47, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
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.
No checkuser evidence of block evasion, though it's a really noisy range. I still think this doesn't come remotely close to addressing the concerns that lead to the block but hey, that's on the reviewing admin. --Yamla (talk) 12:45, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- Jaydenstyy, I agree with Yamla above that your request doesn't really demonstrate that you understand the reasons why you were blocked. Please outline the reason/reasons why you were blocked (be as specific as possible) and what you will do next time to avoid making those mistakes in the future. Z1720 (talk) 01:03, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
- You guys are just mean people who want to block people who are just misunderstood and is why nobody uses this website specifically but talks about other websites. Jaydenstyy (talk) 01:10, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Unblocked session
[edit]Jaydenstyy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
1. I understand that I have caused disruptive editing on Wikipedia, along with issues to use Verifiability and Biographies of a living person despite many warnings and didn’t use reliable sources from them. You guys thought I used sock puppets but that was my younger sibling doing that. I’ll try to not use this website as much to fix those mistakes as that was the problem in the first place. 2. I’ll try to not cause disruption and damage to the Wikipedia articles to avoided being blocked again because I don’t want to see that feeling of me being the bad guy on this wiki. To avoid this I’ll try not to make wiki articles that don’t exist and leave them as is. 3. I will try to make as much useful contributions into the wiki’s instead that have a source article to use it for. 4. I should know that this block isn’t always necessary for no disruption and damage to the articles in general. Hopefully, I will be unblocked soon but only time will tell. Jaydenstyy (talk) 9:11 am, 5 November 2023, Sunday (1 month, 9 days ago) (UTC−5)
Decline reason:
I'm sorry, we are unable to unblock you at this time. After at least six months, you can request unblocking. Please describe concisely and clearly how your edits merited a block, what you would do differently, and what constructive edits you would make.You should not evade your block by editing the English language Wikipedia from a different account or while not logged in during this time. Before again requesting unblocking, please read the Guide to Appealing Blocks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:17, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
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.
Jaydenstyy (talk) 14:11, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
I’m sorry for my misbehavior on Wikipedia.
[edit]Jaydenstyy (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Dear Wikipedia, I'm sorry I’ve caused disruptive editing in this website in general.
I’m also sorry for causing the disruptive editing in verifying my articles and making the biographies on living persons have enough research and detail to them instead of having no sources being stated to them despite having multiple warnings across it.
I also tried to make the biographies of living people articles have no real/unreliable sources on them and that was a huge mistake in my part.
I will always need to make sure that the articles have sources behind them not make them seem like they never happened at all.
I also need to make sure to have improvement and not act like I have change when in reality that wasn’t the case at the time.
I'm deeply sorry for the pain and obnoxious that I did in my editing on the site and wanted to let you all know it’s all in the past.
Best, Jayden. Jaydenstyy (talk) 01:37, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Procedural decline only. This unblock request has been open for more than two weeks but has not proven sufficient for any reviewing administrator to take action, or you have not responded to questions raised during that time. You are welcome to request a new block review if you substantially reword your request. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
- the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
- the block is no longer necessary because you
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. signed, Rosguill talk 14:35, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
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.
Jaydenstyy (talk) 01:37, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
No CU evidence of recent block evasion, but it's a very, very noisy range. I already reviewed an unblock request so won't be reviewing this one. --Yamla (talk) 10:32, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Jaydenstyy, could you explain, in your own words, what a reliable source is, and which statements on Wikipedia need to be backed up by reliable sources? --Blablubbs (talk) 11:26, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- A reliable source is information that you can use to back up your facts that you state and the statements that need to be backed up on Wikipedia are ones that don’t have any citations on them and if they have a source somewhere they should be used. Jaydenstyy (talk) 06:04, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Two more questions. First, what do you mean by
and if they have a source somewhere they should be used.
? Second, how do we determine whether a source is reliable or not? signed, Rosguill talk 18:13, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Two more questions. First, what do you mean by
- A reliable source is information that you can use to back up your facts that you state and the statements that need to be backed up on Wikipedia are ones that don’t have any citations on them and if they have a source somewhere they should be used. Jaydenstyy (talk) 06:04, 11 October 2024 (UTC)