Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:16, 3 May 2018

Editing by unregistered users from your shared IP address or address range may be currently disabled due to abuse. However, you are still able to edit if you sign in with an account. If you are currently blocked from creating an account, and cannot create one elsewhere in the foreseeable future, you may follow the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Request an account to request that volunteers create your username for you. Please use an email address issued to you by your ISP, school or organization so that we may verify that you are a legitimate user on this network. Please reference this block in the comment section of the form.

Please check on this list that the username you choose has not already been taken. We apologize for any inconvenience.

July 2017

You seem to constantly edit various articles without adding any valuable sources and did not seem constructive to me. I recommend you use the talk page first before making such edits to the number of articles you edited. Thanks. (N0n3up (talk) 07:01, 22 July 2017 (UTC))

I recommend you take it to talk before you delete them. Just because YOU view them as such, does not mean they are.

Actually, it's you who needs to take it to talk since it's you who are making the initiative edits, and you've done quite a lot and most of them without sources or talk page consensus. I've reverted most of your recent edits as custom to keep eye on such constant IP edits. Please see WP:BOLD. Also remember to sign your messages. (N0n3up (talk) 17:40, 7 August 2017 (UTC))

BTW just reverted edits without sources. (N0n3up (talk) 17:45, 7 August 2017 (UTC))

August 2017

Hello, I'm Jusdafax. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Lone Wolf McQuade— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Jusdafax 07:16, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Victoria Harbour crossings, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Citobun (talk) 11:16, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

September 2017

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to President of Singapore. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Misplaced Pages:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Jim1138 (talk) 03:48, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Misplaced Pages, as you did with this edit to Cassini–Huygens, you may be blocked from editing. -★- PlyrStar93. _{→Message me. ←} 03:50, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Oi. Learn to assume good faith. I've corrected it now!101.178.163.208 (talk) 03:52, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Misplaced Pages, as you did with this edit to Ash (disambiguation). -★- PlyrStar93. _{→Message me. ←} 04:27, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

I've made a mistake you twit.

Names go on Ash (name) See wp:No personal attacks Jim1138 (talk) 04:32, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Okay, sorry. And thanks.Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). But please, tell the other guy to stop making threats. I mean, how was I to know this? 101.178.163.208 (talk) 04:33, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Jordan Ash

Is a minor character in The Human Sexipede i.e. does not meet wp:notable (people). Create an article for Jordan Ash, then add his name to wp:disambiguation pages. Jim1138 (talk) 05:05, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

October 2017

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Caribbean Sea. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Misplaced Pages this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Misplaced Pages is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. BilCat (talk) 09:38, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Rachel Dolezal, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. SwagGangster 01:37, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Misplaced Pages, as you did at Rachel Dolezal. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Misplaced Pages's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Misplaced Pages's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. SwagGangster 01:41, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Edit warring on Caribbean Sea

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Caribbean Sea. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Jim1138 (talk) 03:47, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

What do you mean by " Do not edit war even if you believe you are right "..

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Singapore Changi Airport. This contravenes Misplaced Pages's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Jim1138 (talk) 03:50, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Competence issue

Your edits at Interstate 110 show a possible comptence issue, as you twice inserted a circular redirect that led back to the dab about a road that was already mentioned on the pae. Doug Weller talk 08:25, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Inexusable anti-Muslim edit

This edit claiming many people said the pilot was Muslim was based on a source which said those people were conservative/rightwin sources and that the prosecutor had denied any relious motivation (sorry. some keys not workin on my laptop). There's no excuse for that. Either it was meant to be anti-Muslim or it was another competence issue, and I'm not sure I should continue to let you edit. Doug Weller talk 08:29, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Either way, I am not responsible for what other people think. And before you accuse me of being Anti Muslim, let me tell you that I regularly visit Muslim countries for holiday and some of my good friends are Muslims.

ok, then you either were careless, didn't read the bit where the prosecution said there was no religious issue, or chose to leave that out. Doug Weller talk 06:07, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Correct on that one. There is alot of stuff I dont know about. I am no Misplaced Pages veteran.

Drmies comment was critical of you but not a personal attack

There's a difference. Doug Weller talk 13:29, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Wrong. Drmies comment was critical and personal. Atleast borderline. If I were to make similar comments against him/her, I would have been told off.

The only difference is your comments/posts were critical and appropriate. I appreciate that.

February 2018

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Misplaced Pages's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Misplaced Pages's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Misplaced Pages, as you did at Syrian Democratic Forces, you may be blocked from editing. Editor abcdef (talk) 10:40, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

March 2018

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Thawb. This contravenes Misplaced Pages's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Doug Weller talk 07:13, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

I did add a source. You yourself admitted it mate.

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to U.S. Route 66. 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 the sandbox. US 66 was in the Texas Panhandle, parallel to, and hundreds of miles from I-10 in the state. They never crossed in Texas. They only approached each other in the state of California, not Texas, so please stop reinserted factually false information. Imzadi 1979 → 05:57, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Vandalism 21-MAR-2018

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Misplaced Pages, as you did at American Airlines Flight 587, you may be blocked from editing. Spintendo      08:29, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

That is not vandalism you twit.

Lets... let's not respond to messages by behaving uncivilly and with personal attacks, okay? Not only is this against Misplaced Pages's policy on user interaction and behavior, it just won't result in any positive or good results - you know what I mean?

Spintendo, can you please explain why you believe this edit that you reverted was vandalism? This user appears to be frustrated over the warning you left and disagrees with it... Thanks :-) ~Oshwah~ 06:33, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

I apologise for that. Oshwah, he has reverted another edit. He claims that the 1960 collision did not happen; that is far from the truth. One of the planes did crash into Staten Island.

@Oshwah: The crash of flight 587 was not a collision, it did not take place in Park Slope, it did not occur during the 1960's, and it did not involve any of the same aircraft type. The only similarities between these two crashes are the IP's repeated attempts at linking both of them together on their Misplaced Pages pages in the face of a clear consensus which reverts their changes each and every time. Not to mention the other dozen complaints on their talk page about them adding spurious, worthless information to many other Misplaced Pages pages. Spintendo      14:33, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Spintendo - Cool deal; thanks for responding and for the explanation :-) ~Oshwah~ 14:38, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Spintendo, so why didnt you say so earlier, instead of beating around the frigging bush? And no, you are wrong. There are other similarities. One plane crashed into Park Slope, the other into Belle Harbour. Belle Harbour is in neighbouring Queens. Both events also involved planes crashing into houses/populated areas. Furthermore, some of the flights had a common airport, JFK airport. Oshwah thanks for your assistance and for your good demeanor.

P)lease stop adding the link to the Park Slope crash without gaining consensus on the talkpage. They're similar only in geography. Bluster is not a substitute for discussion, and a slow-motion edit-war to get your preferred version is disruptive. Please reconsider your approach to other editors. See my talkpage note here Acroterion (talk) 11:45, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

March 2018

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Misplaced Pages, as you did at Staten Island, you may be blocked from editing. An airplane crash that did not happen on Staten Island is not relevant to the article. You have already been warned about this, as well as several other cases of adding factual errors and editing disruptively. epicgenius (talk) 13:19, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

What kind of editor are you? You pick on me and you fail to do your research?? Next time read the whole article.

Show me some reliable sources then. Or else you will be reported. Also, I guess you failed to read the article yourself, because the text you were adding is already mentioned in another section. An air crash is not transportation, so stop blaming other people for your own wrongs. epicgenius (talk) 12:31, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Then why didnt you say so earlier? I HAVE put a source in my edits last week. And if you look at the article there is NO source, so atleast I have added a source. You should swallow your own advice and stop trying to make it seem that you have a clean, perfect record. Sure report me, and I will report you.101.178.163.208 (talk) 07:10, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Constant edits

I reverted some of your edits in a few articles since they don't really seem constructive. I asked you multiple times to explain yourself and your edits on the talk page which you refused, which I can assume that your edits must be in bad nature due to the fact that you refuse to use the talk page. I'm really reluctant on IP's so I think you should really consider using the talk pages whenever you have the chance. (N0n3up (talk) 17:14, 28 April 2018 (UTC))

How come other users did not revert my edits? What makes you a special user? Sorry, I do not need to explain my edits to you, you are the one vandalising the page by deleting content. Even User CambridgeBayWeather was happy to help me. 101.178.163.208 (talk) 02:39, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Many of your edits lack sources and for many instances gave you the chance to make your case on the talk page yet refused, which I can assume that it's because your edits aren't as well intentioned enough to support them on the talk page and your behavior and disregard for consensus with other editors shows me that your arbitrary nature will not fare well. That's the meaning behind WP:BOLD, if someone reverts you then you take it to the talk page and discuss why your edits are legitimate. This assures that your edits are well-intentioned contributions and shows me that you are not an arbitrary troublesome as you've been acting throughout your time in Misplaced Pages. At this point you should have at least told me why your edits are correct in the talk pages of the articles you've been reverted. Nevertheless you've been attacking other editors you have different opinions than your own, above for example instead of trying to be diplomatic and constructive your get in the offence and start making personal attacks which shows me that you're not serious about collaborating with other editors nor being constructive. Again, If an editor makes "new" changes to an article and gets reverted then that editor is the one who makes the case on the talk page, not the one who reverts, again that's what BOLD means. You have been having an arbitrary attitude, it's time you started acting more constructive. (N0n3up (talk) 06:39, 30 April 2018 (UTC))

It's a good idea for you to do the same. All you have done is acted like a vandal. I too have asked you but you refuse to talk. At least the other editors have been helpful unlike you. And they also have reverted your edits, but you keep deleting them. What do you have to say to that? Oh that's right, the rule probably don't apply to you.

Again, I didn't initiate the edits. When someone initiates an edit in an article and gets reverted, they talk it out on the "talk page", that's the rule in WP:BOLD and since it's you who initiated the edits, not me, the onus is on you to provide an argument. Also, the "no, it's you who should..." type of rebuttal won't get you anywhere but closer to a block. This and also the way you interacted with other editors as seen above is sufficient enough for a block if I were to report you, which I have been generous enough not to on the hopes that you would get wise enough to use the talk page, but considering how long this has been going on, I will consider otherwise. (N0n3up (talk) 05:53, 1 May 2018 (UTC))

Agree with N0n3up. I have deleted the photo again. You added it; Please justify on the talk page why you feel it should be there.Phatblackmama (talk) 18:15, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

May 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Louvre Abu Dhabi. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. {{u|zchrykng}}  02:16, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.