User talk:MidnightSilver

MidnightSilver, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi MidnightSilver! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Worm That Turned (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:05, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

July 2016

Hello, MidnightSilver, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia. Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who use multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. Leaky Caldron 17:44, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making test edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Liz Smith (actress). It is considered vandalism, which, under Wikipedia policy, can lead to being blocked from editing. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Leaky Caldron 17:57, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Thank you. Leaky Caldron 18:02, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Sro23 (talk) 16:58, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. Leaky Caldron 18:01, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Chloe Hewitt

The article Chloe Hewitt has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 17:18, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Celebrity Big Brother 18 eye.jpeg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Celebrity Big Brother 18 eye.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:12, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Big Brother's Bit On The Side 2016 titles.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Big Brother's Bit On The Side 2016 titles.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:32, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Lauren Goodger.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lauren Goodger.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Majora (talk) 20:56, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Lady Leshurr.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lady Leshurr.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Majora (talk) 21:20, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Laura ankle injury

First of all I didn't add that in because I was watching the show like everybody else and you could always change it yourself. MSalmon (talk) 21:00, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Strictly

I reverted it to Fuortu's edit. Lupus28 (talk) 18:27, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit to Strictly Come Dancing (series 14)

Hello, and thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to the Strictly Come Dancing (series 14) article. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. Thank you! ronaz ^Talk! 17:25, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

November 2016

Your recent editing history at Strictly Come Dancing (series 14) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. ronaz ^Talk! 09:06, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, MidnightSilver. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Jennifer Gibney in 2014.jpeg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Jennifer Gibney in 2014.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:01, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016

Your recent editing history at I'm a Celebrity...Get Me Out of Here! (UK series 16) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Class455 (talk) 23:43, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Celebrity Big Brother 19 eye logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Celebrity Big Brother 19 eye logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:44, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't

Hello, I'm Trey Maturin. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Gavin Rossdale have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ◦ Trey Maturin 20:58, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. ◦ Trey Maturin 21:01, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2017

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. IdreamofJeanie (talk) 21:02, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Gavin Rossdale. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 21:04, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Hi. I've blocked your account because it appears to have been compromised, given this account's edits to restore vandalism on the Gavin Rossdale article. Please see WP:COMPROMISED for advice on what to do once you've regained control of the situation. Thanks, —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 21:12, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Jennifer Gibney in 2014.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:Jennifer Gibney in 2014.jpeg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 18:30, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Jennifer Gibney in 2014.jpeg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Jennifer Gibney in 2014.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:33, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Lauren Goodger 2016.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lauren Goodger 2016.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 15:43, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

I have been blocked for disruptive editing and block evasion, could someone please tell me what I have to do to be unblocked, as this is my main account I wish for this one to be my account, I will list all of my sockpuppet accounts and following that I will be inactive and make no edits, as that's what User:Yamla told me to do. And I don't want my constructive edits removed obviously, but could you please explain to me what I can do to be able to edit again My Sockpuppet Accounts User:MystiqueDominique User:Starburst20 User:Starburst50 User:AllThingsTelevision User:Lauren's World User:ZestyLemonz User:LemonadeLemonz User:StopDeletingMyPages User:Username323232 These are the ones I remember however more are stated on the page. I do wish to edit constructively, and apologies for my block evasions. If you could tell me EXACTLY what I need to do now and everything about applying for the standard offer. Thanks.

Decline reason:

You've been told. Over. And. Over. And. Over. And. Over. And. Over. Again. Zero edits. ZERO EDITS. Let me say that again. ZERO EDITS. For at least six months. No edits at all from you, whether signed in or not. No edits from you for six months. And I want to be clear, this is the absolute minimum. Now, go away for at least six months. Talk page access revoked. Yamla (talk) 16:12, 26 July 2017 (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.

Note that the above unblock request contains a blatant lie. That is not the full list of sockpuppet accounts. --Yamla (talk) 16:14, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of 5 After Midnight

The article 5 After Midnight has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The group has no relevance outside a runner up role in the X-factor, massive amounts of tabloid sources cover any attempt to find anything reliable. It wouldn’t be hard to recreate this very basic stub if anyone wanted to remake it later.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Dysklyver 12:27, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Honey G (rapper) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Honey G (rapper) 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/Honey G (rapper) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. SecretName101 (talk) 01:52, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Peri Lomax.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Peri Lomax.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:38, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]