User talk:LordAgincourt

Hello LordAgincourt! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Hipal/Ronz (talk) 16:26, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Useful templates • Categories • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Tools • User scripts

Blocked

You have been blocked temporarily from editing 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 ~~~~}}.

You were repeatedly told not to remove content from other people's talk pages, yet you've continued to do so. Let this serve as a warning, your actions are disruptive. --Yamla (talk) 10:55, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello i was never warned i would be blocked for this. One user only asked me not not to remove content from his talk page.I was not aware i could be blocked for this. Nor was i aware it was considered disruptive since i removed my own comments thar were never replied to or a talk page “conversation” that had ended. Now that i am aware it is disruptive and i could be locked i wont do this again. Please unblock me LordAgincourt (talk) 12:40, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2020

A page you created has been deleted as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject or any other entity. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. Cabayi (talk) 18:28, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for making personal attacks towards other editors. 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 ~~~~}}. Cabayi (talk) 18:30, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Filing a sockpuppet investigation against the admin who blocked you and providing no evidence is a clear personal attack to try and deter future blocks. It doesn't work. Cabayi (talk) 18:33, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Turkmens, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Visioncurve^{Timendi causa est nescire} 06:59, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Ganja, Azerbaijan. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Wario-Man (talk) 14:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about. Please dont waste my time and throw false accusations at people. If you dont like my contribution than say that instead of lying and violating wp guidelines and creating a disruptive environment. LordAgincourt (talk) 15:35, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Wario-Man (talk) 05:16, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

At Persephone, you have twice inserted the same information, and twice been reverted. The reverting editors are asking for a reliable source. Please do not reinsert the material without that source. If you are having trouble finding a source, please consider that the information may not be suitable for the article, or that it needs to be rephrased.

Reverting editors are also saying the information does not belong in the lead. The lead of an article is used to summarize the information in the body of the article. If it is not in the the body it should not be in the lead. You can read the guideline Manual of Style: Lead section if you are having trouble determining what information belongs where.

Finally, I ask that you stop taunting other editors. Your behaviour on user talk pages is against the core Wikipedia value of civility. Please realize that other editors are here to improve the encyclopedia, just like you. You have already established yourself as a problematic editor (unsourced, poorly formatted, incorrect usage, reinstating reverted material without listening to other editors' problems with it). Adding taunting is throwing gasoline on a fire. You need to shine up your image with proper grammar and spelling; proper usage of reliable sources; asking for help if things such as lead/body become confusing; and stop the personal comments. I would recommend Five pillars and Contributing to Wikipedia for immediate reading.

Stay safe, good luck, and happy editing! 76.119.40.77 (talk) 05:45, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Hello, I'm Diamond Blizzard. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Return of the Jedi, 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. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Diamond Blizzard talk 05:42, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am having trouble liking references but a New York times article online confirms this so it is verifable. LordAgincourt (talk) 05:56, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you link to the article here? Then I can try helping you to properly add the reference to the page. Diamond Blizzard talk 06:13, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was actualy a test screening but this is the only other reference i could find. It is #24https://www.wired.com/2013/05/return-of-the-jedi-anniversary/ LordAgincourt (talk) 15:13, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So, I checked, and while the article does mention a test screening, it doesn't seem to say that it happened earlier that month, unless I'm missing something. Also, it is just one brief mention in one article. I do not really feel that it would be notable enough to mention unless you can find more sources discussing the screening. Diamond Blizzard talk 17:44, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Juicy Fruit (song), you may be blocked from editing. SummerPhD^v2.0 13:55, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I wanted to let you know that your recent edit(s) to the A Nightmare on Elm Street plot summary have been removed because they added a significant amount of unnecessary detail. Please avoid excessive detail and high word counts when editing plot summaries/synopses. You may read the plot summary edit guides to learn more about contributing constructively to plot summaries/synopses. There are also specific guidelines for films, musicals, television episodes, anime/manga, novels and non-fiction books. 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. DonIago (talk) 01:22, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Def Leppard. - FlightTime (open channel) 19:37, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot be blocked for that and don’t violate civility rule with unwarranted threats LordAgincourt (talk) 19:40, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And stop disrupting my talk page with disruptions LordAgincourt (talk) 19:44, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can indeed lose your editing privileges. Take the advice. SolarFlash^Discussion 19:45, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Apalachicola people, 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. SolarFlash^Discussion 19:48, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020

Please refrain from making changes to plot summaries/synopses that conflict with the plot summary edit guides, as you did at A Nightmare on Elm Street. You may wish to review the specific guidelines for films, musicals, television episodes, anime/manga, novels and non-fiction books. Excessive detail and high word counts should be avoided. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 13:42, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

October 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Churchill, Manitoba, you may be blocked from editing. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:08, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Churchill, Manitoba. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:14, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:57, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]