User talk:Miamiguy100

Welcome!

Hello, Honoluluguy100! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 06:04, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests 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 Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community (The Signpost)
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Recent edit to Honolulu

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Honolulu, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed 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! -War wizard90 (talk) 01:46, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 2015

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Honolulu has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Honolulu was changed by Honoluluguy100 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.871155 on 2015-03-07T18:35:06+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 18:35, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

How do i change my username? I hate it.Honoluluguy100 (talk) 19:08, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You can request a username change at WP:Changing username/Simple. Please make sure that the new name is available; you can use Special:ListUsers to check the list of registered users. Huon (talk) 19:20, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Why is it important to source info and discourage original research (why is verifiability so important)? For example, my edits to Miami have been reverted because it was regarded as original research. And the info was true: Miami is the second largest city in FL and the enormous amounts of coconut trees is an indication of the warm tropical climate of the city. Everyone knows that. Miamiguy100 (talk) 21:08, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Verifiability and WP:No original research are absolutely fundamental polices (together with WP:Neutral point of view), and without them Wikipedia would be something quite different and less useful. The point of WP:V is that a reader should not have to rely on Wikipedia, but should be able to check where the information comes from. That's why a published source is required. The point of WP:NOR is that an encyclopedia is not a place for new ideas, or people's own opinions, only for summarising already published material. Without them, Wikipedia would become something between a discussion forum and a blog. There are plenty of those about, but we are trying to do something different. JohnCD (talk) 22:12, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Miami

Regarding this edit and your edit summary, what you are talking about sounds something like Simple Wikipedia. --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 19:22, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

April 2015

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Miami has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Miami was changed by Miamiguy100 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.93899 on 2015-04-19T19:12:50+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 19:12, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Miami, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. —SMALL JIM 19:21, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Honolulu, you may be blocked from editing.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Honolulu was changed by Miamiguy100 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.931512 on 2015-04-19T19:27:57+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 19:28, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Miami. RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 19:53, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from abusing warning or blocking templates, as you did to User talk:Racerx11. Doing so is a violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you. Amaury (talk) 21:07, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent disruptive editing. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. —SMALL JIM 21:09, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Miamiguy100 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Smalljim, my edits were not disruptive. I was only trying to help young readers by reducing the article length so it can be understood more easily for them. Miamiguy100 (talk) 21:14, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Even accepting the claim that you felt young readers were too stupid to understand more than three lines of text, that is not an excuse for edit-warring. Also, Wikipedia is written for everybody, not just the young. Huon (talk) 21:21, 19 April 2015 (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.

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).

Miamiguy100 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

But, the young readers need simple articles. I can help benefit both them and Wikipedia. Miamiguy100 (talk) 21:37, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Smashing idea; go here. Kuru (talk) 21:46, 19 April 2015 (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.

@Miamiguy100: You're not really helping your case. If you want to be unblocked, you need to address the concerns that got you blocked in the first place, agree to cease your edit war, and instead discuss the edits you want to make on the articles' talk pages to reach a consensus. - Amaury (talk) 21:44, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]