User talk:SRJ1234
Welcome
[edit]
|
June 2020
[edit]
Hello, I'm Prahlad balaji. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Sally Thomsett, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. ◊PRAHLADbalaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 17:30, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 1
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
- John Levene (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Callan and The Rivals of Sherlock Holmes
- Valerie Leon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Let There Be Love
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:49, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
July 2020
[edit] Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Say My Name (film)—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 13:21, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 8
[edit]An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- John Levene (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Callan and The Rivals of Sherlock Holmes
- Linda Regan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to ITV and George Cole
- Nicholas Lyndhurst (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Bullshot and Sky Bandits
- Brian Murphy (actor) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Boon
- Colin Baker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Hustle
- Kate Williams (actress) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Doctor at Large
- Lisa Bowerman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Casualty
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:23, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
These edits are correct and to the best of my knowledge. They are also from reliable sources too. Thanks for letting me edit Wikipedia. SRJ1234 (talk) 07:28, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
July 2020
[edit]
Plot descriptions cannot be copied from other sources, including official sources and IMDb, unless these can be verified to be public domain or licensed compatibly with Wikipedia. They must be written in original language to comply with Wikipedia's copyright policy. On Evil Never Dies (film). — Diannaa (talk) 11:31, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
Recent edit reversion
[edit]In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.
I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.S Philbrick(Talk) 13:10, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 15
[edit]An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Nicholas Lyndhurst (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Bullshot and Sky Bandits
- Colin Baker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Hustle
- Sally Thomsett (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to ITV
- Together (2018 film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to British
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 22
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sue Holderness, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page It Could Happen to You.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:27, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
July 2020
[edit] Hello, I'm SovalValtos. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Kirk Ella, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. SovalValtos (talk) 19:12, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 3
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Graham Cole, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page A Clockwork Orange.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:49, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
23 Walks
[edit]Hey! I was looking at 23 Walks, and it looks like you added that it had a release date of 8 July 2020. While this is what IMDb says, I can't find any reliable source corroborating that information, so it is most likely false. I've replaced it with the earliest release date I could find from a reputable source. Please try not to use IMDb as a source, it is occasionally inaccurate and it's content is user generated, which means it should not be used as a reliable source. Let me know if you have any questions! BOVINEBOY2008 21:50, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 17
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Katy Manning, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages It Runs in the Family and Blithe Spirit.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:07, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of A Suburban Fairytale for deletion
[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article A Suburban Fairytale is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Suburban Fairytale until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 17:54, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
August 2020
[edit] Your addition to Disciple of Death has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Moneytrees🏝️Talk🌴Help out at CCI! 16:49, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
Katy Manning's Theatre listing
[edit]Hello, and thanks for your work lately on the Katy Manning article. I notice that you added a section for her theatre appearances, then removed it. Do you mind if I ask why it was removed? I acknowledge that much of it was unsourced, but it is hardly likely to be controversial.--Gronk Oz (talk) 04:26, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 13
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Susan Penhaligon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bergerac.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 20
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Madeline Smith, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jason King.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:17, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
The article Sue Vanner has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 15:24, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Sue Vanner moved to draftspace
[edit]An article you recently created, Sue Vanner, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Praxidicae (talk) 17:53, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 9
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Michele Dotrice, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Jason King and The Rivals of Sherlock Holmes.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:16, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
November 2020
[edit]
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Underworld (2003 film). Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use your sandbox. Not sure why you felt calling it an American film was appropriate, as there are multiple countries listed, and sourced, in the infobox. DonIago (talk) 14:34, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Sue Vanner has been accepted
[edit]
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 05:29, 22 November 2020 (UTC)Nomination of Sue Vanner for deletion
[edit]A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sue Vanner is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sue Vanner until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 15:23, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Disambiguation link notification for November 30
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Carole Lesley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Embezzler.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:51, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Recent edit reversion
[edit]In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.
I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.
I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:13, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 7
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Caroline Munro, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The New Avengers.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:25, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
The article Decrypted has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Promotional article. Zero RS coverage as yet. Only coverage in article was a cryptocurrency site, non-RS. WP:TOOSOON at absolute best.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. David Gerard (talk) 15:23, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of The Head Hunter (2016 film) for deletion
[edit]The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Head Hunter (2016 film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
BOVINEBOY2008 22:40, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Spiteful Puppet
[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.
A tag has been placed on Spiteful Puppet requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, 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. Shirt58 (talk) 12:13, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
December 2020
[edit] Hello, I'm GenQuest. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Alfred Hitchcock, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. GenQuest "scribble" 05:00, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 6
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Deborah Watling, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Epping.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Image without license
[edit]Unspecified source/license for File:Blackwood film poster.png
[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Blackwood film poster.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. 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 after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. 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 MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 11:45, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Listen (2020 film)
[edit]Hi. If you want to change the film poster, simply upload a new picture over the existing file, per WP:FILMPOSTER. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 10:57, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Nomination of Two Words (film) for deletion
[edit]The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Two Words (film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
BOVINEBOY2008 10:49, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Image without license
[edit]Unspecified source/license for File:Alma halliwell.png
[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Alma halliwell.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. 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 after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. 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 MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 18:45, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Unspecified source/license for File:Amanda barrie in 1965.png
[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Amanda barrie in 1965.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. 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 after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. 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 MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 18:45, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of File:Amanda barrie in 1965.png
[edit]
A tag has been placed on File:Amanda barrie in 1965.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement of https://www.gettyimages.ca/detail/news-photo/british-actress-amanda-barrie-plays-cleopatra-in-the-comedy-news-photo/3064783. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, 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. Whpq (talk) 19:16, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
CCI Notice
[edit]Hello, SRJ1234. This message is being sent to inform you that a request for a contributor copyright investigation has been filed at Contributor copyright investigations concerning your contributions to Wikipedia in relation to Wikipedia's copyrights policy. The listing can be found here. Thank you. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:03, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
January 2021
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Moneytrees🏝️Talk🌴Help out at CCI! 21:54, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
SRJ1234 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hello - I am user SRJ1234. I previously made an appeal but a user called yamla told me to post it on my talk page as well. I (and my IP address) have been blocked indefinitely from Wikipedia for a small copyright violation. Even the user who has blocked me has said it was a 'small' violation. The edit in question for my blocking was from when I recently created a page for the film November 1st. It was shortlisted for a BAFTA so therefore I thought it was a notable film and that it deserved a Wikipedia page. When adding a plot summary, there was nothing anywhere else on the internet except the original summary on the film's official website; there is nowhere on the internet to watch the film to create my own summary, so I copied and pasted the one from the film's official website but with a reference to the page directly next to it. This edit is the one in question for my block, but the user that has blocked me has done so because they have said my edit was unreferenced even though it was; I want to stress no disrespect to the user that has blocked me.
Since creating my account last year, I have taken great pleasure in editing and creating articles about film and television (my main interests) and keeping many articles up to date and usefully expanding articles - I have often been 'thanked' by other users for my added content that I have done extensive (referenced) research for. I have very much enjoyed editing Wikipedia making it better for other users and readers on articles of my interest, in fact it has been one of the few pleasures I have been able to do to distract myself from the ongoing depressing time with the coronavirus. It has been a very hard time for me and I took solace in helping Wikipedia to become a better place and will miss doing so if my appeal is declined. I was terribly saddened and disappointed to find out I had been blocked earlier, and I am sure that as an administrator, the reader of this appeal would miss editing Wikipedia if they were not allowed to do so like I am missing doing so now, although I do sincerely recognise I have been blocked for a reason. I have not been blocked before and I urge you to give me a second chance. However if you decide to decline my appeal, I understand the reason why.
I agree I made a few wrong decisions when editing which had led to my blocking - but I am sure you will understand we all make mistakes as we are all human, but I am not a user that constantly vandalises or makes malicious edits; I merely try to edit and add pages or pictures to articles about little-known notable films or actors, not articles of famous subjects or those that are visited often. I fully understand one hundred percent why I have been blocked and am not disagreeing that I have done nothing wrong; however I will not make this mistake again and understand I should have used my own words instead, although I do think blocking me indefinitely as well as my whole IP address so no one else in my household can edit Wikipedia just from me copy and pasting a small description of two or three lines is perhaps a little harsh and I did provide a link which maybe was not the right thing to do, nevertheless I understand why I have been blocked for copy and pasting this description. I'm an experienced contributor with hundreds of previous edits and have not been blocked before. Nevertheless have had a good read of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks too as well as the copyright policy as my blocker advised me to, and I now feel I would make a better contributor after reading these. If you choose to unblock me, which I hope you do, I wholeheartedly promise to only make small (referenced) edits that only involve adding small amounts of information or adding an actor's new film to their filmography table. Thank you for taking the time to read my appeal, I appreciate it, and I hope you have a nice day and wish you well with editing Wikipedia, and hopefully if I am unblocked you will see my name on the edit history of a couple of pages. Many thanks - SRJ1234 :). SRJ1234 (talk) 16:53, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You seem to have confused our sourcing requirements with our policy on copyright. They are unrelated. You can't copy-paste someone else's copyrighted work into Wikipedia, even if you link to where you found it. If you can't view the film itself, you can summarize the press materials in your own words. The key phrase here is "in your own words". I'm not sure that you understand that copy-pasting text is what got you blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:42, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
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.
- Note: the text in the unblock request was changed after my decline. SRJ1234, please don't do that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:37, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
SRJ1234 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hello, I'm SRJ1234.I hope you can help me. I've been 'indefinitely blocked' for copy and pasting one line of material with a reference next to it. I'd please like you to consider if blocking me and my IP address from just copy and pasting one line of text with a reference is perhaps too harsh?I know what I have done wrong and accept I made a mistake and will not do it again and will make productive contributions. I urge you to give me a second chance; I haven't been blocked before. I understand that my edit was inappropriate for this site, and confirm that I won't do it again. I made an appeal on my talkpage to say I know what I’ve done wrong while promising not to do it again and to give me a second chance as I haven’t been blocked before. This was declined with the administrator simply saying I've confused your sourcing requirements with your policy on copyright and should've used my own words which I agree now would've been the thing to do. Since then, I've read all the relevant policies and now think I'd make a better contributor. Even my blocker said it was a small violation. I'll tell you the story so you have context of the problem. It'll probably be ignored but it's there if you want a friendly read. The edit in question for my blocking was from creating a page for the film November 1st.When adding a plot summary there was nothing else on the internet except the original on the film's website and couldn't think of any other words to use so I copied and pasted the one from the film's website but with a reference to the page next to it. I now know this was wrong. The copied material only made up one line and not the whole article. My blocker said the edit was part of a recurring problem. I've looked through my talkpage and contributions and have counted about five minor potential problems (I know five too many). You're welcome to have a look; I won't be obstructive. Since creating my account I've taken pleasure in editing-I've often been thanked by users for my content after my extensive research. I've enjoyed editing Wikipedia making it better for others. It’s been one of the few pleasures I’ve been able to distract myself from the depressing time with coronavirus. It’s been a hard time for me and I took solace in helping Wikipedia and am missing doing so tremendously; it meant a lot to me-it was a lifeline in the difficult time I'm going through and my blocking has made me further depressed; I was saddened to find I'd been blocked. I'm sure as an administrator if you weren't allowed to edit you’d miss doing so like I am now but know I've been blocked for a reason however small it is. I've not been blocked before and I urge you to give me a second chance. I made a wrong decision when editing-I'm sure you'll understand we all make mistakes and are all human but I'm not a user who vandalises or makes malicious edits. I didn't make this edit to cause trouble; I meant no harm. I'm an experienced contributor with over a thousand edits and haven’t been blocked before which surely shows I'm not a bad user. Please I'll do whatever you want to get myself unblocked like reading more policies or anything. If you choose to unblock me or even reduce my block I wholeheartedly promise to not make this mistake again and plead with you to give me a second chance. I really hope this can be resolved and I’d be forever grateful if you unblocked me; I know this different appeal will probably be declined as well but if you decide in your position of power that I'm not suitable, worthy or to be trusted to be in the friendly 'editor family' again it was worth a try. It was good while it lasted. I wish you well and I thank you for taking the time out of your day for reading this. Many thanks, SRJ1234. SRJ1234 (talk) 5:32 am, 26 January 2021, Tuesday (1 month, 13 days ago) (UTC−6)
Accept reason:
Accepting unblock having gotten the go ahead from the blocking admin. signed, Rosguill talk 16:58, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
Rosguill, Having read the appeal I have no objections. Moneytrees🏝️Talk/CCI guide 14:55, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Nomination of The Krays: New Blood for deletion
[edit]The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Krays: New Blood until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.