Jump to content

User talk:Colton Meltzer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by UTRSBot (talk | contribs) at 00:00, 14 February 2019 (This appeal is now closed (Peachy 2.0 (alpha 8))). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Speedy deletion nomination of WWE Evolution (pay-per-view)

[edit]

Hello Colton Meltzer,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged WWE Evolution (pay-per-view) for deletion, because it appears to duplicate an existing Wikipedia article, WWE Evolution 2018.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

JTP (talk • contribs) 01:20, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

UFC Fight Night: Manuwa vs. Santos - PROP (proposed for deletion)

[edit]

Hi Colton Meltzer, Please note that I have reverted your edit on above page. We dont need to delete the article and recreate it when headlined bout changed (the name of the article). When the event name is confirmed in UFC.com website, we will move the article to that said name. Let me know if you need further clarification or assistance.

Note: If you want to achieve your talk page messages, pls go to the below and add the two templates on your talk page. It is not adviceable to delete your talk page messages, as it would raise questions by admins in future when you request for certain user rights.

Template:Talk header and Template:Archive box.

Cheers CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:24, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, Glenn Jacobs (politician)

[edit]

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.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Glenn Jacobs (politician). First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Kane (wrestler). Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Kane (wrestler). If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Prefall 21:56, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Common name

[edit]

After your discussions in Kane and Neville articles, I suggest to read more about the wikipedia policies about article names, like WP:COMMONNAME. Pac is clearly not the common name for Mr Satterley. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 13:15, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@HHH Pedrigree and HHH Pedrigree: Kane is not part PAC move request and dont give me this misguidance of WP:COMMONNAME. Colton Meltzer (talk) 00:46, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You started a move request in Kane a few months after the last request. Now, you have started a new request without citing a policy. It looks like you don't know about the titles and WP:COMMONNAME. The article should reflect his common name. He is known worldwide as Neville after years in WWE and winning several titles. There is no way Pac is the common name. And the reason you gave is "he is using PAC now", which is against COMMONNAME. Just like many other wrestlers, like Chris Masters, Alberto Del Rio... it's not just he is using the PAC name, PAC has to be the common name and right now, he only wrestled in minor promotions for one month. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 13:15, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

[edit]

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote—in order to influence Talk:Neville (wrestler)#Requested move 13 November 2018. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. JTP (talk • contribs) 02:34, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]


You said, and I quote "Post your SUPPORT Move Request >". That's the opposite of neutral and nonpartisan. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 18:30, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@NotTheFakeJTP: @HHH Pedrigree:Completely disagree with such claims or have a guts to think that...i notified a few random users who voted in the past. "Random - made, done, happening, or chosen without method or conscious decision." - Bogus claims as usual and same people being misguided by others. - I did say that, to tell to support the move request indicating to post Support or Oppose on there.Colton Meltzer (talk) 09:56, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

UFC 234

[edit]

Hi Colton Meltzer, Greetings to you thank you for your edits. Please note that when an bout is announced by the press, the bout will be placed on the "Announced bout" section. When the bout is shown on the UFC.com web site fight card that the bout will be removed from the "Announced section" to the fight card section. thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:28, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

UFC 234 - info claimed needs to support by source

[edit]

Hi Colton Meltzer, Greetings. Please note that info claimed on the fight card table needs to support by source. If you see the source just underneath the fight card table and if you check the source,the source has not shown the bouts. That is how Wikipedia works - info claimed need to support by source so it could be verified. When a bout is announced by press, editors put the sourced bout on the "Announced bout" section. When the bout shown on the UFC.com fight card then the announced bout would be removed and place it on the event fight card.Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:26, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@CASSIOPEIA: Nope, Ever since the UFC revamped their website, their information been unreliable. https://www.ufc.com/event/ufc-denver-2018# Yair vs Korean Zombie Time info is off when it was he Ko at 4:59.https://www.ufc.com/ UFC.com info is off a bit. Now it time to depend on WP:RELIABILITY. https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=UFC_234&oldid=871892965 in this edit. I shown single reliable source showing reliable source for these fights placed in that event.

Robert Whittaker (c) vs. Kelvin Gastelum

Anderson Silva vs.Israel Adesanya

Hi Meltzer, Good day. I understand your reason. Please note UFC fight card has always been delayed on the old website and a little more so with the new one at the moment; when a bout is announced and it usually dont show on website until later time, as the bouts could change due to many reasons, such as fighters suffer from injuries, can not obtain visa in time, personal reasons and etc. A reliable source means the source is reputable such as major newspaper, books or journals and etc (New York Times, Sydney Morning Herald). An official website of a company is considered not independent, and "sometimes" considered not reliable. However, it could be used for content in Wikipedia but it can NOT be used to demonstrate/contribute the notability of the article.
When a bout is cancelled or new fighter has been replaced, the fight card still shown the old pair in the UFC fight card. We usually indicate "TBD" on the fight card in Wikipedia when a fighter cant compete due to injury when press announce it. When a press announced the replacement, we will remove the bout from fight card (TBD) and add on the new replacement fighter and place it on the announced bout section.
Do note, press announced the bout but does not announce the fight card, that is the different.
Also, reliable source means the source is reputable source. When a source say MMAjunkie reports a fault info (say wrong indicate wrong fighter for a particular bout), we would still indicate the info as per source until the source (can be other sources not the original source) corrected itself and we would reflect accordingly. Wikipedia is about verifibility - see WP:NOTTRUTH. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 05:17, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@CASSIOPEIA: I still do not get. I showed a reliable source showing them they are fighting and officially placed in the card. The source also includes the UFC 234 Poster front of podium stand. If a fighter a replace, no problem we change info as long a source is displayed.
Robert Whittaker (c) vs. Kelvin Gastelum for UFC Middleweight Championship - Main Event
Anderson Silva vs.Israel Adesanya - Co Main Event
Colton Meltzer (talk) 09:01, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Meltzer, sorry for not explain myself well. Ok let me try again and hopefully I get it right this time :).
The source on the press indicated Whittaker and Gastelum as main event and Silva and Izzy (ANZ calls Adesanya as Izzy) as comain - this we would put it in the "background section".
The fight card section - as norm, the source beneath the fight card table indicated [1]. If you go the the source site (UFC.com), there is nothing there at the moment. Thus the fight card in Wikipedia would reflect the same as per source. I hope I explain better this time. UFC has been delayed in updating the card more so than recently, UFN 142 in Adelaide, the fight card was not indicate which fights were in main/prelim and early premlim, to almost a day before the event. We (one of the active MMA editor) update the info (half day earlier than UFC.com web site) as per reliable source (dont remember it was MMA junkie or MMA fighting). That was the first time I notice UFC.com updated the fight card so late, not sure they were busy with TUF 18 finale, or they dont have enough staff or the new website gave them probblem :). Anyway, let me know if you need further clarification from me. By the way, I would like to take this opportunity to thank your for being so active in your contribution on WikiProject MMA articles.Thank you for your contributions. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Meltzer, Just to let you know that one of regular MMA editor has updated the fight card for UFC 234 and UFC on ESPN+2 as they (I use they instead of he/she as it is the norm in Wikipedia not to "genderlise" (not such word, I just invent it :)) an editor if the editor is not known) use the local ufc web page instead of UFC.com (US site) (see the source beneath the fight card table) - see UFC 234 (AU UFC web site) and [http://www.ufc.com.br/event/fight-night-brazil-feb-2-2019 UFC on ESP+ 2 (Brazil UFC web site). Cheers. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 13:22, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fighter's weight

[edit]

Hi Meltzer, the weight in the infobox corellated to the weight division they fights. Don need to change the weight-in weight. If the HW fighters weight is way off from the max weight division, you would put the normal weight they weight in and dont need to change every time. Such as Stipe has never weighted 265ib but around 245ib (+ -), so just keep the weight as what it is. thank you. Btw, it was good to point out Grey Hardy's background story - thank you and happy editing. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:29, 8 December 2018 (UTC) @CASSIOPEIA: Domestic violence controversy problem will probably proceed with more info. Not a good start for the first event of year and ESPN. Colton Meltzer (talk) 06:32, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well indeed not a good idea to put both bouts in the same card IMHO. You have a good nite watching UFC 231. cant wait. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 06:51, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@CASSIOPEIA: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=UFC_Fight_Night:_Cejudo_vs._Dillashaw&oldid=872728252 Is it a good idea to add small section for Domestic violence controversy on UFC Fight Night 143. Greg Hardy and Rachel in same card. Domestic violence controversy Colton Meltzer (talk) 20:38, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Meltzer, greetings. You have missed understood me :), guess it was the way I wrote the message. I meant the promoter (UFC), it is not good idea for UFC to put both bouts in the same card. Cheers. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:56, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@CASSIOPEIA: No i am asking putting a small heading is good or not allowed. Some guy kept removing it?
Hi Meltzer, it depends. to me it is good to put under a separate section but it would be debatable for other editors. that "some guy" is always do that, needs to have the last say in everything, needs to be right all the times and not polite at times. Leave it as it is, if you dont want to get into unpleasant conversation that "some guy". choice is yours. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:42, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Happy new year

[edit]
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year 2019!

Hi Colton Meltzer, Sending you a warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019 and may this new year bring you joy and laughter. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 15:49, 13 December 2018 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.[reply]

UFC on ESPN 1

[edit]

Hi Meltzer, Your edit has been reverted as they headliner is only in work and not official confirmed. You have been informed a few times how things work in Wikipedia and UFC event. Unless the information is official confirmed (a bout, an event, a headliner) then it is added to the sourced info into the article. Please refrain yourself of doing such as you will be warned. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 05:53, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@CASSIOPEIA: uk.ufc.com says otherwise. Colton Meltzer (talk) 06:40, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Meltzer, your edit was without source and see here - no indication from UFC uk - [2] and [3]. Please be patient and wait until it is announced it. thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 07:42, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@CASSIOPEIA: Nope, the uk.ufc.com possible leaked (or web developer mistake) for that moment i clicked the Headliner was indicating the headliner that i changed in the edit. I think its fixed now by the UFC Web Developer. Colton Meltzer (talk) 21:46, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

UFC 235

[edit]

Meltzer, pls use only one UFC.com fight card and not mixing them using 2 sources. If you going to use UFC.com US then remove the 2 from the fight card and place it on the announced bout section. UFC event has always been using UFC.com US as the source until recently as the bouts place in the web site was late which we hope UFC would rectify soon. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 06:09, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@CASSIOPEIA: per WP:CITE i am allow to use multiple sources to support the information - This is common guideline for a User. Mickey Gall fight and Women bout was correct edit inserted. UFC 235 (US) site will have the rest just like US 235 (AU) site will have rest fight card finalized. They going same direction.Colton Meltzer (talk) 21:12, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Meltzer, if you look throught all the past event, it always use one source for the fight card. What UFC local fight card web sites might not be the same as UFC.com fight card. as you notice, many times when a bout cancelled or a fight injured and not able to fight, the fight card card in US or local UFC fight card not updated but Wikipedia would have more update info as we a small group of MMA editors keep them updated and supported with source which you dont see in other combat event especially the WWW which have a lot of followers for the sport and in Wikipedia (many edit without support by sources). We use the norm as how all hundred of events to edit same way as norm. Multiple sources could be used in Wikipedia to confirmed the content claimed especially for living biography which might threaten a person reputation/legal issues, and for due weight reasons. But for fight card, which one indicated such and other indicated the other is confusing. Just wait for a few more weeks and everything would be posted in UFC site just as so many new editors would put a "at work" / "rumors" "Instagram/twitter" / forum/chat room bout on the fight card or on the "Announced bout" section. Just be patient a little. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:53, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@CASSIOPEIA: You see it changes every time. UFC 235 Colton Meltzer (talk) 03:41, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Meltzer, yes it has changed but the fight card on Wikipedia is as per source. Hope UFC (US) website would update the fight cards quicker so we dont have this issue soon. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 05:45, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

[edit]

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BusriderSF2015, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community. JTP (talk • contribs) 02:41, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Appeals

[edit]
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).

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

Request reason:

I was in no way affiliated with this account. I did not get any notification about this sockpuppetry investigation on the top right of my page ("your alerts" icon) until now. I would of defended myself. Colton Meltzer (talk) 21:45, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Now is the time to defend yourself! Open up a new unblock request and address the concerns raised at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BusriderSF2015. Yamla (talk) 21:53, 29 January 2019 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I was in no way affiliated with this account. I was given notification months ago (October 2018) for my "pinging" issues. I acknowledged. Addressing " Both use the same broken English and random capitalization" disruptive issues. I am not as active as you say. I do take break from my edits to look at how others edits to improve mines unless i am not allow do that. Copyright violations? I can`t find any on my uploads. If i needed help then i would of went to someone talk page for help or article talk page. I believe i improved overtime if you look at my recent edit history.Colton Meltzer (talk) 22:25, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The evidence showing that both accounts are operated by the same person is quite convincing. Unblock declined. —DoRD (talk)​ 22:58, 29 January 2019 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I been blocked because i broke the same rules that "busrider" account broke. Where the evidence for Copyright problems? I haven`t seen any. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UFCFightNight143poster.png I was in no way affiliated with this account no matter what. I believe i am already in process on improving overtime. Per Meltzer history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Colton_Meltzer . Colton Meltzer (talk) 23:46, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You're both on the same ISP, live in the same area, edit the same articles, and have the same behavior. What are the odds of that? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:59, 30 January 2019 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Decline reason:

The "I am not a crook sock" defence didn't work for Nixon, and it won't work here. Unless you are able to either a) provide a plausible explanation for the similarities between the two accounts or b) 'fess up and accept that you screwed up by using multiple accounts, you are wasting your time (and ours) by making unblock requests. Yunshui 雲水 09:10, 31 January 2019 (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.

@Yunshui: Per WP:GAPB. I believe i made a simple explanation for the similarities above the recent unblock request. Colton Meltzer (talk) 10:55, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You'll have to point me towards that more precisely, because I'm not seeing it. "Other people may have used this computer" doesn't come close to explaining the similarities in editing (and is unprovable in any case). Yunshui 雲水 11:07, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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).

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

Request reason:

I was not aware of breaking some of the rules that "busrider" account did.I believe the "similarities" were a coincidence. This will not happen again. I also think there some important stuff missed before blocking me. (see below) I am here to stay and prove my innocence further by improving articles like i did here

Colton Meltzer (talk) 01:10, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Simply looking at the behavior here, it is clear you are the same person. You've also wasted enough administrator time that I'm revoking your talk page access. Further appeals may be made via WP:UTRS. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:36, 12 February 2019 (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.

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Colton Meltzer (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #23940 was submitted on Feb 13, 2019 21:15:41. This review is now closed.


--UTRSBot (talk) 21:15, 13 February 2019 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Colton Meltzer (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #23943 was submitted on Feb 13, 2019 23:01:45. This review is now closed.


--UTRSBot (talk) 23:01, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Colton_Meltzer&oldid=883212390"