User talk:JohnTombs48

Welcome!

Hello, JohnTombs48, 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:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

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 ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Tuanminh01 (talk) 11:15, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

September 2016

Hello, I'm Mattythewhite. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Plymouth Argyle F.C., 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. Mattythewhite (talk) 11:35, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Plymouth Argyle F.C.. Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Mattythewhite (talk) 11:55, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Evandro Rachoni De Lima

The article Evandro Rachoni De Lima has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NFOOTBALL.

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. Mattythewhite (talk) 18:34, 15 September 2016 (UTC) What on earth do you mean? He is a player who has played for Crawley Town in the F.A cup and has articles on ITV, FourFourTwo and the BBC Sport saying he is real! I just want to write articles on here man! I'm not a hoaxer!![reply]

September 2016

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at User_talk:Mattythewhite#Re:_Evandro_Rachoni_De_Lima, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Mlpearc (open channel) 19:18, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Evandro Rachoni De Lima. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Mattythewhite (talk) 12:21, 17 September 2016 (UTC) e:afd-notice --> Struway2 (talk) 09:42, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mousehole A.F.C. for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mousehole A.F.C. 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/Mousehole A.F.C. 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. Cabayi (talk) 11:02, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Okehampton Argyle F.C. for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Okehampton Argyle F.C. 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/Okehampton Argyle F.C. 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. Cabayi (talk) 11:02, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lejuan Simmons, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Striker. 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) 11:32, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hashtag United F.C. for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hashtag United F.C. 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/Hashtag United F.C. 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. Nordic Nightfury 10:02, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Signing comments

Hello. I have noticed that in a number of discussions, including Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hashtag United F.C., you usually do not sign your comments. Doing so allows everyone to know who made the comment, otherwise discussions could become very confusing. Please begin signing your comments by adding ~~~~ at the end of your comment. There is even a handy button below the text edit window which will had the tildes for you. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 03:50, 18 October 2016 (UTC) I don't really see the point seeing as it is done automatically by bots within seconds, but ok I will in the future.[reply]

Please note that the bot did not follow and sign your new comment here, so you cannot rely on the bots to do this for you. There are also a number of technical reasons to add your signature; there are guidelines and policies at WP:SIGN which describe why it is important to add your signature and when you should not use your signature. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 22:28, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ewan Clancy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ewan Clancy 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/Ewan Clancy 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. Spiderone 08:32, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

October 2016

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. 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 may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 14:29, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

JohnTombs48 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #16808 was submitted on Oct 30, 2016 14:50:38. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 14:50, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bbb23 Per the 'confirmed sockpuppets', Robcrowley50 is not mine, it is a user who goes to my school so the ip will be the same. The other accounts were for when i forgot my password. I have appealed the ban today, it would save a lot of time if you maybe considered unbanning me? Thanks. JohnTombs48 (talk) 16:15, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe you. The editing timing doesn't support your having forgotten your password unless you kept forgetting it and then remembering it, etc. The IPs you were using do not belong to a school. The RobCrowley 50 account and the master account just happened to edit the same articles, not to mention the same topics of interest. You have virtually no hope of being unblocked until you tell the truth.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:31, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

- I can't really be more truthful than that because that's the truth, I suggest you check the ips used on RobCrowley50, one will not be the same as my account, and the ips of creation on JohnTombs48 and RobCrowley50, both of which I supposedly own are of Coombe Dean School, I know this because we both made them in school. Who is to say we don't have the same interests? That is why I knew he made an account and the articles he edited. What happened to WP:GF? I stand by what I said Bbb23.JohnTombs48 (talk) 17:43, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stop wasting other peoples time. If this does not stop I suggest removing TPA. - Mlpearc (open channel) 17:48, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If I have to lie to get myself unbanned so I can continue to contribute to the wikipedea (which I have done a lot more of than my edit count suggests), I will. Its my account, User:Mlpearc. JohnTombs48 (talk) 17:56, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok fine, User:Bbb23, I used the other 2 accounts other than robcrowley50 on afds of my articles because I was too embarassed to comment on them myself. Is there any chance of an unban in the near future? JohnTombs48 (talk) 15:45, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Appeal

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).

JohnTombs48 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand why I was blocked and i'm sorry

Decline reason:

If you would like to regain the trust of the community then the standard offer is available. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:01, 1 November 2016 (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.

I have used sock accounts before and now I am blocked indefintely. I understand why this is wrong and i'm sorry. As you can see by my [1] I have done a lot of editing on wikipedia, including writing around 15 articles. I really am passionate about wikipedia and really want to continue to make positive contributions. Please consider giving me a second chance. Thanks, JohnTombs48 (talk) 08:57, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]