User talk:Gamerguy94

Welcome

Hello, Gamerguy94, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! CommanderWaterford (talk) 08:56, 21 July 2020 (UTC) Getting started Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia Finding your way around Table of contents Directories and indexes Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse The Help Desk, for more advanced questions Help pages Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles How you can help Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

July 2020

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door, did not appear constructive and has 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 commit vandalism and removing sourced information just to prove a point. This is disruptive. OceanHok (talk) 06:56, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Toa Nidhiki05 13:33, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Talk:Paper Mario: The Origami King. Thank you. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 21:51, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

August 2020

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to assume bad faith when dealing with other editors, you may be blocked from editing. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 20:15, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing indefinitely for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 ~~~~}}.  -- ferret (talk) 00:02, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

At first I was going to block you for a week for the disruption you're causing, giving you an opportunity to come back and maybe accept consensus and what other editors were telling you. While I was reviewing your edits and placing that block though, you got your last edit in at the Origami talk page, and it's frankly completely unacceptable. You block is indefinite. -- ferret (talk) 00:05, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Gamerguy94 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Reached consensus in an earlier discussion. Other newer editors who were not involved in that discusion were not aware of that and so they acted like it never happened even though I told them it did! Wrongful block based solely on refusal to acknowledge that the earlier discussion had indeed reached a consensus as well as based on defamation!

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Reached consensus in an earlier discussion. Other newer editors who were not involved in that discusion were not aware of that and so they acted like it never happened even though I told them it did! Wrongful block based solely on refusal to acknowledge that the earlier discussion had indeed reached a consensus as well as based on defamation! |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Reached consensus in an earlier discussion. Other newer editors who were not involved in that discusion were not aware of that and so they acted like it never happened even though I told them it did! Wrongful block based solely on refusal to acknowledge that the earlier discussion had indeed reached a consensus as well as based on defamation! |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Reached consensus in an earlier discussion. Other newer editors who were not involved in that discusion were not aware of that and so they acted like it never happened even though I told them it did! Wrongful block based solely on refusal to acknowledge that the earlier discussion had indeed reached a consensus as well as based on defamation! |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

@Ferret: That is total BS! I DID accept consensus! There was a consensus on the very same page that was reached LONG before the others went on there and messed that up! The consensus reached was to just call the game an "action-adventure RPG" and be done with it- which I agreed to! Everyone else who was involved in that consensus agreed to it as well! The other editors who since changed it again despite a CLEAR consensus that I even mentioned to them refused to believe it! However, a consensus WAS reached, and I agreed to it! It was done with after that first consensus! You've blocked me invalid reasons! I'm the one striving to make Wikipedia a better place, so unless you want to be taken to court for defamation, I would HIGHLY suggest you undo that block before law enforcement becomes involved! I also have no idea what "last edit" you are even referring to, as I have not edited that page in a VERY long time at this point! Quit being asinine! Gamerguy94 (talk) 00:39, 6 August 2020 (UTC)