User talk:Kenzie2012

March 2017

Please stop making disruptive edits, as you did at Jason Alexander.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. —ATS 🖖 talk 04:15, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Keith Ferguson (voice actor). —ATS 🖖 talk 04:17, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In an effort to strike a kinder tone

... I would urge you to please familiarize yourself with what Wikipedia is, and what Wikipedia is not.

In particular, Wikipedia is not a blog, a fan site, a shrine to anyone, or anything else that is irrelevant, unreliable and/or non-notable. We frankly don't care whether "most people hate this site!" We care about encyclopedic fact—and, for example, whether Jason Alexander is a "poker player" is not one of them. (In an encyclopedic context, only someone who gained sufficient notability as a poker player would even have that listed in the article, never mind in the lead sentence.)

We hope you'll continue to contribute in a constructive manner, but this requires that you understand what is acceptable and what is not. When an edit is reverted, there's almost always a good reason—don't be afraid to ask. Sometimes the reversion is wrong; in those cases, communication helps all editors involved get even better.

My talk page is linked in my signature if you have any questions. —ATS 🖖 talk 04:42, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2017

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Penn Jillette. —ATS 🖖 talk 22:08, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kenzie2012. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Bbb23 (talk) 17:16, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kenzie2012, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

McGeddon (talk) 09:37, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]