User talk:Mix Bouda-Lycaon

Flash drive

Ok, so what? Drewcifer (talk) 07:52, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

People keep deleting it probably because they have no reason to believe you. Do you have a reliable source to back it up? If not, then it shouldn't be added. Drewcifer (talk) 03:47, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what to tell you. If it wasn't news worthy for any publications, then it doesn't have much of a chance to be put into Wikipedia. We need some way of verifying it besides your word. Drewcifer (talk) 21:29, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Seapig.jpg

Hi, with File:Seapig.jpg you have labelled it as a fiar use stock photo for use only on Wikipedia. This is not free enough to be used here. There is a special policy on WP:Fair Use but this almost certinly does not fall into the category. We are looking for a license like CC-BY-SA-3.0 or CC-zero or public domain. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:26, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

October 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Mjpresson (talk) 17:36, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Missing edit summaries and citations in your edits

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thanks, and happy editing.

Mjpresson (talk) 17:39, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Kishi (demon)

The article Kishi (demon) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Existence of this legend is attested by reference, but its notability is not shown.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:39, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Marcellus Gilmore Edson

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Marcellus Gilmore Edson, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Fæ (talk) 07:34, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Js photo 4.png

Thanks for uploading File:Js photo 4.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 09:06, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Beautiful image but I have license concerns. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:47, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Lucens Reactor.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lucens Reactor.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 05:05, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Mix Bouda-Lycaon. 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]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mix Bouda-Lycaon. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

September 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:50, 27 September 2018 (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).

Mix Bouda-Lycaon (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

GREENREAPER JUST DOXXED ME ON WIKIFUR WHEN IVE DEMANDED EXCLUSION. HE IS USING THESE WIKIS TO CALL ME A NAZI AND I HAVE BEEN ASSAULTED BECAUSE OF SUCH. THIS IS ABSURD. UNBAN ME ALREADY. HE IS BULLYING ME AND I NEED HIM TO FUCKING STOP. http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/User:Mix I WANT EXCLUSION

Decline reason:

Wikipedia has got nothing to do with Wikifur, so if you have any problems at Wikifur you will have to sort them out there. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:53, 27 September 2018 (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).

Mix Bouda-Lycaon (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Well, sorry. Can I have less of an indefinite ban? That's a bit much. Mix Bouda-Lycaon (talk) 21:58, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. 331dot (talk) 22:18, 17 October 2018 (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).

Mix Bouda-Lycaon (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

"the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or *the block is no longer necessary because you *#understand what you have been blocked for, *#will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and *#will make useful contributions instead." Ok. I understand and accept.Mix Bouda-Lycaon (talk) 22:29, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As per 331dot, below. Yamla (talk) 11:20, 18 October 2018 (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.

Please indicate your understanding by answering the points specifically as they relate to your block. It is not enough to just say that you understand. For example, what useful contributions do you intend to make? 331dot (talk) 00:20, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

331dot (talk) 23:50, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]