User talk:Kevinsanc

February 2023

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Sanctioned Suicide. 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 your sandbox. Thank you. Happy Editing! -I Followed The Username Policy (talk) 17:48, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't, but thanks. Kevinsanc (talk) 19:00, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your user name

It has just occurred to me that your username Kevinsanc might be read as Kevin (from) Sanc{tioned Suicide). If that is the case, then you should probably read the rules about conflict of interest edits. Round and rounder (talk) 21:29, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just a coincidence. I have no relations to the site. Kevinsanc (talk) 18:50, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

{{Admin help}}

Could we get a cleanup on edits made on the Sanctioned Suicide talk page, it seems that someone with an IP that starts with 104. is just spamming it up and not adding any real value to it. They're posting original research that isn't sourced and what they have posted is just unsourced gossip. Kevinsanc (talk) 04:04, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to work on an article you can create a page called User:Kevinsanc/Draft. There you can work on it until you get approval to move the content to the mainspace without having to worry about it being deleted. --Trade (talk) 00:56, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Kevinsanc (talk) 14:20, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2023

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Megan Twohey. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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 noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 06:25, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My edits were not vandalism, but alright. Kevinsanc (talk) 06:27, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't issue you a warning for vandalism. Unconstructive editing is not the same as outright vandalism. I didn't issue you a warning for nothing either, since removing properly sourced information is considered disruptive. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 06:32, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, however the article is in a bad state and irrelevant information is being injected in by blocked users. Kevinsanc (talk) 06:34, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is not true. Check the history. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 10:01, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Same goes for the history of Sanctioned Suicide. You seem to disagree with some additions by calling it vandalism or saying it's been added by blocked accounts, which isn't the case. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 10:03, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Check the IP edits... Those IPs are blocked now. Kevinsanc (talk) 20:50, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

With a registered account, you can change several of Wikipedia's appearances. Go to preferences and hit the gadgets tab. Scroll down to 'appearance'. You should see "Strike out usernames that have been blocked". It's a handy feature! For me, on your talk page I immediately see that Round and rounder has been blocked. Despite the description of the feature, it also shows IP users that have been blocked. So as an example, on my watchlist, I see that on the video game series Horizon, there's been a lot of activity by this blocked IP user.

Going back to your reply, the article on Sanctioned Suicide was created on February 10 by Freedom4U (see here). Of the IP users and registered accounts who've edited since then, there is one and only one account that has been blocked. And that is... Round and rounder. Except for that account, no other has been blocked. Not a one. Nada. Zilch.

In case you were talking about Megan Twohey, its history tells me that the only recently blocked account is Zipper410, which happened in mid-December.

Long story short: I can see there aren't any blocks. You have no reason to remove the properly sourced information. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 21:31, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edits made by the following IPs, which are the vast majority of the last 100 edits have been blocked for ban evading for a month:

2600:4040:4030:5000:3367:6585:cf1f:252c

2600:4040:4030:5000:9aae:2d1e:5d5a:a2f7

2600:4040:4030:5000:9904:CC24:A780:A4E

2600:4040:4030:5000:f559:c9f:7fd9:f308

2600:4040:4030:5000:f475:9e45:f00e:d932

2600:4040:4030:5000:EEF2:869C:547F:8E1F Kevinsanc (talk) 00:24, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

but i am going to drop it, because im tired of the back and forth Kevinsanc (talk) 00:26, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently been editing articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated a contentious topic. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;

comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;

follow editorial and behavioural best practice;

comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and

refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

––FormalDude (talk) 00:25, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this! :) Kevinsanc (talk) 00:40, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. ––FormalDude (talk) 13:42, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Kevinsanc (talk) 14:13, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]