User talk:Novemberjazz: Difference between revisions

Welcome!

Hello, Novemberjazz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 23:21, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Margaux Avedisian, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Armenian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mark Stodola, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Big Brothers Big Sisters (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mount Sims, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Margaux Avedisian, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page St. Thomas Aquinas High School (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:37, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Carol Ann Mooney (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Saint Mary's College

Steve Bellone (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to JD

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bryan Steil, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Republican (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Thousand Oaks shooting: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 15:31, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Kelly Armstrong (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to 1L

Mark Gordon (politician) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Joseph Meyer

Steve Carter (Indiana politician) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Indiana University School of Law

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Brandon Maxwell (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Bravo TV

David Rhodes (CBS News President) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Ben Rhodes

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, KidAd. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Where in https://www.washingtonian.com/2009/07/22/the-son-also-rises/t did you see Robert Allbritton mentioned? I pulled up that link and only got a directory of doctors. —C.Fred (talk) 14:16, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I'm going to put up this as a test: https://www.washingtonian.com/2009/07/22/the-son-also-rises/ It links to the correct page for me. KidAd (talk) 14:51, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Angela Robinson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MFA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:17, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! wumbolo ^^^ 20:00, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.  Bishonen | talk 10:43, 28 November 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Template:Z33

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.  Bishonen | talk 10:43, 28 November 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Template:Z33

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 19:53, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Please see MOS:LQ for how to handle punctuation in quotations on Wikipedia. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 21:48, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following topic ban now applies to you:

You have been topic banned from post-1932 American politics for three months.

You have been sanctioned for persistent disruptive editing and edit warring. When I wrote in my warning here that you need to discuss on talkpages, I didn't mean that lying about sources on talkpages, as you do here, was an acceptable way of supporting edit warring on the article.

This topic ban is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. Please go to WP:TBAN and read the information there to see what a topic ban is. If you do not comply with the topic ban, you may be blocked for an extended period, to enforce the ban.

If you wish to appeal against the ban, please check out the process described here, or ask on my talk page and I will explain how to do it. Bishonen | talk 04:33, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As you know you are banned from editing anything to do with post 1932 American politics. Paul Ryan is an article you are banned from editing. I have reverted your last edit to that page based on that ban. ~ GB fan 00:48, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I also reverted your edit to Pat McCrory as that is also covered under the ban. ~ GB fan 00:51, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

¡Ay, caramba! KidAd (talk) 00:52, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To enforce an arbitration decision and for blatantly violating your topic ban from American politics multiple times, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:22, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

---

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

I will be blunt: your behavior on Wikipedia is not acceptable to the community. None of your replies so far shows an understanding of what you did wrong or a commitment to change your behavior.

Here is what you need to do:

Spend your one-week block thinking about whether you are willing to follow our rules.

When your block expires, spend the next three months doing productive editing in other areas and getting along with other editors.

When your topic ban expires, limit your self to noncontroversial edits on the political pages (you might even want to stay away from them voluntarily for another three months), and just decide that you will never again get into a fight with another editor no matter how right you think you are and how wrong you think they are. Just walk away and let others deal with it. And no sneaky backdoor attempts to rejoin the battle, either; that will only get you blocked indefinitely. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:03, 30 November 2018 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I promise I will not do it again. Please accept my ban appeal. Please copy my appeal to BOTH arbitration enforcement noticeboard and administrators' noticeboard and Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Decline reason:

Sit out your block, and go away for one week. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:30, 30 November 2018 (UTC) Appeal made by IP, not by logged-in user, so not a legitimate request. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:18, 1 December 2018 (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.

For the record, I did not write this, and I have no idea why anyone would write it on my behalf. KidAd (talk) 18:41, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Geolocation for the IP addresses is consistent but also on the other side of the US from where you state your home town is on your user page. As this appears to be a Joe job, apologies for my earlier decline message, then. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:45, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this certainly was not me. I'm from the Bay Area (public info on my user page) and I'm currently in Manhattan. So, yeah, I didn't make any request. Thanks. KidAd (talk) 18:50, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Currently in Manhattan? The IP address geolocates to Queens. Not that that proves anything -- there are nearly nine million people in NYC -- but it isn't on the other side of the US, either. I believe KidAd when he says he didn't do it for three reasons: [1] He didn't have to mention Manhattan, [2] He doesn't strike me as being stupid, and evading your block with a post to AN would be very stupid indeed, and [3] WP:AGF. --Guy Macon (talk) 20:21, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The posts on User talk:72.68.236.118 really look like someone trying to get KidAd in trouble. Also, KidAd typically uses proper grammar and punctuation, and 72.68.236.118 does not. --Guy Macon (talk) 20:29, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciation all around. For clarification and transparency, I have been on the Upper East Side of Manhattan all day, and rarely (if ever) leave the island. Thank you for the understanding. I have been using the "Blocksite" Chrome extension to further comply withe my current block. Thank you. KidAd (talk) 20:56, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I wished to acknowledge your message, and let you know that I appreciate your explanation and regret any difficulty you've had. 331dot (talk) 22:12, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your understanding. Happy December, KidAd (talk) 22:19, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• @KidAd: I apologise for not noticing that the unblock request was made by an IP editor and not by you. I have amended my decline reason. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:18, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• @Boing! said Zebedee: I appreciate that. Thank you. KidAd (talk) 16:20, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is KidAd. Guy Macon (talk) 21:57, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To enforce an arbitration decision you have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. Ymblanter (talk) 22:48, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

---

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

You have been topic-banned from the topic of post-1932 American politics for three months on 29 November. On 30 November, you were blocked for violation of this topic ban for a week. Today, after the block expired, you made the following edits [1] [2] which clearly violate your topic ban. My conclusion is that you are not interested in abiding by the topic ban. Hence, I blocked your account for a month.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:48, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]