User talk:TheRoboKitty

January 2021

Hello, I'm IHateAccounts. An edit that you recently made to Talk:Shenendehowa Central School District seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want to practice editing, please use your 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! IHateAccounts (talk) 15:57, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:BitChute, you may be blocked from editing. IHateAccounts (talk) 23:34, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not to be used as if it were a board for personal arguments or complaints. As such, I reverted your comment at Talk:BitChute since it had no relation to the task of creating an encyclopedia and therefore was not in compliance with wikipedia policies.

Similarly, comments such as "Please bring back edits from the big funnyman" [1] fail to follow wikipedia policy as well.

Please do not add disruptive items like this to Wikipedia again. IHateAccounts (talk) 23:40, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at BitChute, you may be blocked from editing. IHateAccounts (talk) 15:52, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm IHateAccounts. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. IHateAccounts (talk) 16:56, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Hello TheRoboKitty and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your contributions, such as the ones to Talk:BitChute, do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox (but beware that the contents of the sandbox are deleted frequently) rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a Help desk, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Jlevi (talk) 20:37, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Armored Skeptic

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 Armored Skeptic requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Spiderone 16:21, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary Sanctions Alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

IHateAccounts (talk) 17:06, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Shoe0nHead

The article Shoe0nHead has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days 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. Lopifalko (talk) 18:17, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Shoe0nHead

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 Shoe0nHead requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Spiderone 18:18, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello TheRoboKitty -- I have moved this to draft so that you can add reliable sources, such as books, magazines or online news sites, that verify the content. You can continue to edit it at Draft:Shoe0nHead. It can be hard to demonstrate the notability of Youtube figures; I suggest that you try looking at other examples in mainspace to see what sort of sourcing is considered acceptable. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:40, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021

A page you created has been nominated for deletion 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. IHateAccounts (talk) 18:26, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm IHateAccounts. I wanted to let you know that some of your recent contributions to We hunted the mammoth have been reverted or removed because they seem to be defamatory or libellous. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. IHateAccounts (talk) 18:30, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:MGTOW TV

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 Draft:MGTOW TV, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Goose^(Talk!) 19:46, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Shoe0nHead

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 Shoe0nHead requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. power~enwiki (π, ν) 20:24, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Armored Skeptic

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 Armored Skeptic requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Spiderone 20:42, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Drmies (talk) 21:21, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why I Should Not Be 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).

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

Request reason:

I was unfairly blocked and I have not engaged in any abusive behavior. In fact , I even apologized to User:IHateAccounts for previously being rude. Also I am aware of my previous account User:Mgtowterf, I have created a new account because I wanted to turn over new leaf and I have changed usernames. TheRoboKitty (talk) 02:56, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Once you are blocked, any use of new accounts is block evasion. Please review Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks, particularly the points on sockpuppetry and checkuser blocks. GorillaWarfare (talk) 03:11, 8 January 2021 (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.

@GorillaWarfare: you can delete those accounts if you want ; all I wanted was to change my username. I am not trying to create sock puppets I just wanted to change my username. If you want you can just delete User:Mgtowterf I don't care. This is my new account and I am sticking with it whether you like it or not. I am here to make productive edits on RW and TOW.TheRoboKitty (talk) 04:20, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries calling others "haters"[2] aren't a good idea.
Your page creations were highly disruptive, both the ones that obviously violated WP:PROMO by trying to boost non-notable individuals with non-WP:RS sources, and the ones that were outright WP:ATTACK pages.
While you claim to have apologized to me, you then went and made this edit [3] to one of your sockpuppets or friends, indicating that you didn't really mean it.
The number of your edits that are so disruptive they needed to not only be undone, but scrubbed entirely[4], are a major problem. This is probably one that should be scrubbed too. [5]

@GorillaWarfare: has given you good advice to review the page policies, but given comments like "This is my new account and I am sticking with it whether you like it or not" and your inability to understand that Rationalwiki is not Wikipedia, it appears that you have no intention to (or possibly, a lack of ability to) follow wikipedia's policies. IHateAccounts (talk) 05:13, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@IHateAccounts: I did not make the edit created by the big funny man, I thought it was funny. And also I do not have any sockpuppets, they are older accounts.TheRoboKitty (talk) 14:22, 8 January 2021 (UTC) @IHateAccounts: lol you don't even know how to use the reply to button!😂😂😂🤣🤣TheRoboKitty (talk) 14:32, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"00:36, 8 January 2021 Drmies talk contribs blocked The Big Funnyman talk contribs with an expiration time of indefinite (account creation blocked, email disabled, cannot edit own talk page) (Vandalism-only account sock of User:TheRoboKitty)" [6]. IHateAccounts (talk) 15:34, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@IHateAccounts: and what evidence do you have that they are a sock of me? Oh wait, you don't! You are just making up fairytales!TheRoboKitty (talk) 15:51, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IHateAccounts

@IHateAccounts:you sound like a Conservapedia editor right now.TheRoboKitty (talk) 14:26, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 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.

GeneralNotability (talk) 19:21, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]