User talk:Cigammagicwizard
NOTE: Previous versions of this talk page are available in the archives
Saw III continued vandalism
Please stop deliberately introducing incorrect information into articles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.
I assume you are trying to be helpful by adding information to the Saw III article, but Wikipedia places a very high value on accuracy by means of citing sources! For some of the cast members (or release dates etc) you wish to add, a link to a press release or article on their involvement would be desireable. --Fxer 01:02, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
User Talk Page
The idea is that you archive your talk page after a few months not just selectively delete the bits you don't like. If you want I can create an archive for you. --Martyman-(talk) 02:34, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
- It is just a copy of your old talk page, kept so that if people want to look back to find soemthing it is easily found. You can see my list of archives linked to at the top of my talk page. --Martyman-(talk) 03:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
- OK, archive created and linked to at the top of the page. It is pretty much just a matter of copying the content to a new page (in this case User Talk:Cigammagicwizard/Archive1) and then removing it from here and adding a link. Feel free to pretty it up any way you want. --Martyman-(talk) 04:14, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Blocked for three days
I'm not sure what on earth you were thinking with your recent edit to Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (film), but that is barely short of abject vandalism. It's clear from looking at your Talk page and your Talk page archive that you have been heavily criticised by other users and are frequently engaging in problematic edits. Therefore I am blocking you for three days for this disruption. You are welcome to return when the block expires, and I would urge you to be exceedingly more cautious in your editing. I will be the first person willing to help you if you make a good faith effort to improve your editing, but rest assured if you continue in poor behavior it will not be tolerated. Best regards, Ëvilphoenix Burn! 23:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
{{unblock}} Ëvilphoenix, why was I blocked? It was the same thing from the article. You can not block somebody who made edits. And my attitude was good. I'm not mad but why block me for 3 days? And evertime I ask this, no one answers: Are you an administrator? I did NOT vandalize because it still got the information. I also added the plot. I don't know why you block me. I always edit and this edit was not vandalizing. The info. in the article was still there but typed differently. I assure you can NOT block people who edit without vandalizing and added a plot for a movie. Cigammagicwizard 01:00, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- why was I blocked?
- You were blocked because you made an edit that reduced a well structured, formatted table of information, with multiple citations, to an uncited, unformatted, barely wikilinked list. That was a major change, which was entirely uncalled for, undiscussed on the Talk page, and innappropriate.
- It was the same thing from the article. You can not block somebody who made edits.
- Yes I can. You made a very very bad edit.
- And my attitude was good.
- Looking back over your contributions, I see that your editing, while problematic, does seem to be reasonably well intended. I don't believe you are editing in bad faith. However I do believe you are editing badly and disruptively.
- I'm not mad but why block me for 3 days?
- I considered unblocking you or shortening your block, but the fact is that your editing is still very problematic, and you have already been blocked several times already, and you do not seem to have gotten the message. Therefore I'm not going to unblock you. If another Administrator is willing to unblock you, that's one thing, but I am not going to lift the block.
- And evertime I ask this, no one answers: Are you an administrator?
- Yes, I am an Administrator. Only Administrators have the power to enact blocks, so anyone that has blocked you previously is also an Administrator. I'm sorry if you have had difficulty in getting responses from other editors and Administrators, part of what Admins are asked to do is be accessible for discussion with anyone we enact a block on, which is why I am responding to your comment and monitoring your Talk page.
- The info. in the article was still there but typed differently.
- No, it wasn't, some of the citations were removed, and the formatting was completely destroyed.
- I assure you can NOT block people who edit without vandalizing and added a plot for a movie.
- I assure you, I can. Vandalism is not the only reason for enacting a block, disruptive editing is another reason, and I find your editing to be disruptive.
I understand from some of your comments that you are 13 years old. Allow me to let you know that that is in no way an excuse for poor editing. Some of our best Administrators and high level contributors are themselves teenagers of 14-16 years old. Further, your work and contribution to Wikipedia will be judged on the quality of your contribution, not your age. You need to be very careful in the future about making large unannounced changes to any pages in the future. If you have further questions I will be watching this page. Best regards, Ëvilphoenix Burn! 02:10, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
So (this is off topic) are you excited of The Inside Man? I'm a huge Jodie Foster fan. And I'm really an intelligent 13 year old. You might seem I'm crazy but I'm not. I play the french horn and in the top Honors Band. I also (almost) get all A's and am in NJHS. Cigammagicwizard 03:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Hey, I really need to post this on the Scary Movie 4 article. Please unblock me so I could post the rating. I always keep things posted in that article. I'm a huge fan so please let me put it on.
PG-13 for crude and sexual humor throughout, some comic violence and language. Go to boxofficemojo.com or comingsoon.net! Cigammagicwizard 03:49, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- No, you don't really need to post that. No, I'm still not going to unblock you. No, I'm not at all excited about Inside Man. Also, you may consider yourself fairly sharp for your age, but your grammar does not impress. Consider forming your sentences more carefully. Lastly, why not go ahead and provide a citation for the edit you want to add? It's as easy as just providing a weblink to where you got your information, by enclosing the URL with [ and ], such as [http://en.wikipedia.org], , which would render out like this: [1]. Ëvilphoenix Burn! 05:29, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:1237.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:1237.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Image legality questions. 09:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
You have been reported for 3RR
You've been reported for violation of 3RR on Scary Movie 4. Please see the report and do not do it again. Also remember you are not entitled to 3 reverts per day: you may indeed violate the spirit of the 3RR by "gaming the system" as you expressed intent to do. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 00:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
What?! This was my FIRST revert in ONE DAY! You live in a different time than mine! I didn't break a rule! I'm telling you the truth. This was my first revert in one day. Not three in one day!
I'm not trying to be mean but 4 people are against me and that's unfair. Now I didn't break a rule so I must object!Cigammagicwizard 00:41, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
You are not blocked yet, but 4 reverts in a 24 hour period is a 3rr and that what you did sadly, you know what you were doing in Scary Movie 4, so you should take a break and think about it. Please see Wikipedia:Fair use as overload of fairuse images are copyvios. Thanks --Jaranda wat's sup 02:12, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
You very much did break a rule. The edit history does not lie. You may want to consider that if 4 different people are against you, you might be wrong. ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 03:09, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
- You have been blocked for 24 hours for a 3RR violation on Scary Movie 4. The reverts were at 00:38, April 5, 2006, 02:25, April 5, 2006, 12:33, April 5, 2006, 21:43, April 5, 2006. Just so you know, living in a different time zone has nothing to do with this. Wikipedia uses UTC. The rule states that no more than 3 reverts to one article may be made in a 24 hour *period*. So, if there is less than 24 hours between the 1st and 4th reverts (and it is here), then you are in violation. This isn't dependent on which "day" the reverts occured on. It's the time period between reverts that counts. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 10:12, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Oh, ok. I get it. I can handle that. Bye! Cigammagicwizard 12:27, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Saw III
Please stop introducing speculation and fancruft information into the article. If you have sources to back it up, then post it.--CyberGhostface 12:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
! This is your last warning. The next time you vandalise a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. — FireFox • T [13:54, 9 April 2006]
Vandalism
It was actually this edit. — FireFox • T [14:00, 9 April 2006]