User talk:Toobevr1244

June 2011

Please do not remove file deletion tags from file description pages on Wikipedia, as you did to File:8B4BF1780FD66F0867E642 Large.jpg, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 05:43, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2011

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Stop removing valid content from Only Girl (In the World) and What's My Name?. They are fine as they are and your edits are disruptive. Calvin • ⁹⁹⁹ 22:38, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 22:50, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for violating Wikipedia policy. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest this block by replying here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}}. You may also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list instead, or mail unblock-en-llists.wikimedia.org. Daniel Case (talk) 22:53, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Toobevr1244 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I don't believe I should be blocked because the two sentences I added to both pages were harmless and were intended to give an idea of how successful the singles were worldwide. By the way, I NEVER vandalized wikipedia. >:-(

Accept reason:

I'm going to assume this was a misunderstanding based on the comments left by others and what I can see with my own eyes, and again I blame our interface for diffs. (I'll even admit that I saw a huge deletion of text until I took a second look myself.) So I'll unblock, but Daniel Case did have a good point, when you were being reverted, you should have taken the discussion to either the article's talk page, or Calvin999's user talk page to resolve it. In fact, I'm almost certain that a simple explanation would have cleared this up quickly. -- Atama頭 04:24, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note from blocking admin: OK, I should have said disruptive editing. But the salient fact is that, rather than initiate this discussion about your edits in response to the warnings above, you continued to edit war. It doesn't matter how right you think you were. Daniel Case (talk) 03:50, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked at Toobevr1244's last dozen or so edits and haven't seen anything problematic. I'm wondering if this is a misunderstanding. Edits like this look at a quick glance like a huge paragraph of information was deleted, but in reality that's because a break in the text was inserted to split 2 paragraphs into one. Wikipedia's rather crude diff interface (the default one at least) can be deceiving in displaying a huge portion of text in red to make it appear deleted. But that's not what happened. In my opinion, the paragraph break was a slight improvement. Also, the claim that was inserted about the worldwide success is supported by the sourced chart demonstrated later in the article.

It's true that there was an edit war, but Calvin999 actually performed more reverts, although he avoided a block in the process. Unless I'm really missing something, it looks like this block doesn't have much of a reason behind it. -- Atama頭 04:19, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To Atama: Thank you for understanding. I actually had a sign that an edit war was occurring when the edits I had contributed were not posted due to 'another editor'. I didn't know, however, that I was doing anything wrong or that I could solve the issue until after I had already been blocked. It really was a misunderstanding. To Calvin999: I'm sorry, I didn't have the intention the hurt the page! Truce! Thanks for understanding.

List of Hot 100 number-one singles of xxxx (U.S.)

Please do not disrupt these articles. Note that stylized text in names (e.g. "Ke$ha" should not be used, as you inserted here [1]. This edit [2]removed a source link without any explanation. These have been reverted.
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. - eo (talk) 11:33, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

November 2012

Please do not add or change content, as you did to Diamonds (Rihanna song), without verifying it by citing reliable sources. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Widr (talk) 07:02, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Macklemore

Thank you for your correction on this page. Bearian (talk) 16:15, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Toobevr1244, 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! Bearian (talk) 16:15, 9 January 2014 (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) 16:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]