User talk:Gooddays/Archive 2

How does tagging work?

Hi. You are continuing to add refimprove tags although the articles are referenced. Besides, you are adding cleanup tags when there is no obvious need for this. Either stop adding tags or explain the problem for each separate article on its talkpage. Otherwise, I will consider your edits bad faith and report your actions. Regards. --Tone 11:08, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for lending your time to help us improve Wikipedia. Refimprove uses simple, general wording so that the template can be used any time referencing in an article needs improvement. Cleanup may be required sometimes to meet Wikipedia quality standards. If you are interested in editing more often than once in a while, we welcome you to log in and participate in our WikiCommunity. Gooddays (talk) 12:27, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure this is a response to what I said? --Tone 12:30, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Gooddays (talk) 12:43, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't look like this. It looks more like trolling. Please, try to participate in a more constructive way. --Tone 12:51, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Wikipedia:POINT is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. Please note that if you continue with such disruptions as you did above, your actions will be reported. Regards. Gooddays (talk) 13:14, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging

Hello Gooddays, by the way, great user name. First, welcome to Wikipedia, and have to say, any and all contributions by well-intentioned editors are always welcomed with open arms. However, I noticed that recently you have been placing a superfluous amount of clean – reference and cite tags to a large number of articles that are clearly referenced and or cited at the bottom of the page. In addition, I noticed that quite few of the articles contained links to other pieces here at Wikipedia. This is, in and of itself, a way to reference articles in that the cites – footnotes and references from the blue-linked page are also included by reference to the additional article. As you may not be aware of, by placing clean-up tags on articles, editors like myself, and a small army of other users, will place these pieces on our WP:Watchlist so we can look – edit – add references too or perform other maintenance duties on the article. When articles are unnecessarily tagged, the time spent, by other editors is wasted. This time could have been spent on other pieces that truly need some loving care. In other word – slow down. Review the article. If it is referenced, at the bottom of the page (with credible – reliable and verifiable sources) and or blue linked to a well-referenced article that does back up the piece, please do not tag. Hope this helps. If you have any questions or need additional help in any area, please feel free to drop me a note. Thanks. ShoesssS ^Talk 13:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page

Hi there. We don't actually delete talk page histories. We archive them so the discussion history can be preserved so I have undeleted that page and moved it to the appropriate title. You can move discussion there to archive it. Thanks! Seraphim♥ ^Whipp 17:03, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:User page#How do I delete my user talk pages.3F ← Here is the guideline which shows practice in regards to talk page deletion. I would suggest that you read this policy too (WP:AGF). Calling two editors who have welcomed you very kindly, "biased accomplices", is a bit of slap in the face. We understand that you're a new editor and we are trying to help. If you do need any more help, feel free to leave me a note at my talk page. Seraphim♥ ^Whipp 23:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

None of you seemed to follow the WP:AGF policy when my actions were concerned. Gooddays (talk) 01:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disruption

Your actions are plainly disruptive now (i.e. the pointless change of AN/I title and spurious allegations). Also I find it very likely that you edited using an ip to personally attack another editor. This is blockable. Consider this a final warning; please desist. Seraphim♥ ^Whipp 00:17, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

signal

from me on the AN/I page. In summary: put in some references yourself--that's what is really needed. DGG (talk) 03:46, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll support your effort when you decide to do so. Now that I have placed tags on many problematic articles, you should have no problems with tracking them down and fixing them accordingly. Regards. Gooddays (talk) 04:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you are probably much better placed to find the appropriate sources than I am. Use your knowledge and access. Make the best contribution here you can. DGG (talk) 16:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Final Warning

I give you a final warning that your tagging of citations missing and expand on town articles is disruptive, especially when you place expand on articles already marked for stub, and if you continue with this, I will block you to prevent further disruption. DGG (talk) 15:43, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

Hi, you just added a "no references" tag to an article to which I added two references just a couple days ago. What are you doing? Antandrus (talk) 04:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, when you tag an article you should provide an edit summary like tagging as unreferenced. If you just write refs, people will think that you are actually adding references and cleanup does not refer to tagging.

Thank you for lending your time to help us improve Wikipedia. If you are interested in editing more often than once in a while, we welcome you to log in and participate in our WikiCommunity. Gooddays (talk) 05:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eighty thousand edits is not "more than once in a while?" LOL. Antandrus (talk) 05:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summary

This is the third or fourth time you've been told, but if your interest is in improving the encyclopedia, leave an accurate edit summary. Something like "adding reference tag" is more appropriate. Seraphim♥ ^Whipp 15:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for extremely excessive inappropriate tagging. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

DGG (talk) 16:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Details: [1] and some other edits just now are continuing additions of "unreferenced" tags to town articles; there have just been many "citation stye" tags to articles with little or not apparent problem that way such as [2], and"copyedit" tags for articles in no more need of it than a few hundred thousand others. This is playing with us, to see what you can get away with, otherwise known as gaming the system.Future blocks will be considerablyl onger if it resumes. DGG (talk) 17:03, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

The reasoning for a block explained in the Details is wrong. The tags in those articles were placed appropriately.

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=The reasoning for a block explained in the ''[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gooddays&diff=prev&oldid=201611823 Details]'' is wrong. The tags in those articles were placed appropriately. |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=The reasoning for a block explained in the ''[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gooddays&diff=prev&oldid=201611823 Details]'' is wrong. The tags in those articles were placed appropriately. |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=The reasoning for a block explained in the ''[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gooddays&diff=prev&oldid=201611823 Details]'' is wrong. The tags in those articles were placed appropriately. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Gooddays (talk) 17:21, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]