User talk:Starbug22

Welcome!

Hello, Starbug22, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! ---- David Benzam^Contact 14:32, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reliant Motors

Regarding "not getting the message" -- that would be you. I removed your edit with the entirely accurate message "rm unsourced and unencyclopedic and non-NPOV section. Take it to talk." Your edit lacks any reliable sources; the single link that it provides does not mention Reliant Motors at all, nor does it include material such as "Naturally, in the UK, this didn't go down well", "needless to say", "derogation", "Ireland", nor "unfortunate consequence". We do not allow original research on Wikipedia; all material must be reliably sourced. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 18:47, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. ----jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 04:09, 21 December 2019 (UTC) t[reply]

December 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. 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 ~~~~}}. TheSandDoctor ^Talk 04:27, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. 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 ~~~~}}. TheSandDoctor ^Talk 04:21, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you continue to add unsourced content in contravention of site policy as you have been doing, you will be indefinitely blocked until such a time as you can demonstrate your willingness to abide by policies that you have been warned about previously. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 06:01, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

November 2021

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to John DeLorean, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Please do not revert what you called "more childish edits" or undo fixes to grammar or wikipedia manual of style. Thank you! Rusalkii (talk) 19:29, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

John DeLorean ‎

I would strongly recommend you self-revert your last edit to the John DeLorean biography, [1] since as I noted both in my last edit summary and on the article talk page, it is undue, poorly-sourced or entirely unsourced, and likely in violation of WP:BLP policy (DeLorian is long dead, but the alleged 'son' isn't). If you want to discuss this, do so on the article talk page. If however you don't do so, after a reasonable period, I will remove the content again, and then report your inappropriate behaviour at WP:ANI if it is restored, where I shall call for you to be topic-banned from content concerning Delorian etc. Wikipedia is not a platform for vacuous tabloid tittle-tattle that no credible source appears to take even remotely seriously. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:31, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]