User talk:123456sticks

September 2013

Please refrain from changing genres without providing a source and without establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Thank you. 69.181.253.230 (talk) 00:42, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 2013

Hello, I'm Abce2. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Emo without thoroughly explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. 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! Abce2 (talk) 22:16, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from changing genres, as you did to Thrice, without providing a source and without establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skarz (talk • contribs)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to change genres without discussion or sources, as you did at Thrice, you may be blocked from editing.

Reply

Alright, I understand. Just a mistake. Abce2 (talk) 22:19, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning. You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Silverstein. Jim1138 (talk) 23:36, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Toddst1 (talk) 19:07, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

123456sticks (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Honestly, I don't know what I did wrong. I know I added some genres without sources. But if you look at some of my edits, many of them I added sources. These two users, for no reason, just keep reverting my edits. Every time I'd add a genre with sources added, they revert it, call it disruptive editing and said on my page I added genres without sources. I added emo on the lostprophets' page since it was sourced. I also added emo to thrice's page with many sources and i also then sourced the other genres. I then sourced indie rock for Silverstein's Arrivals & Departures album. How is it "disruptive editing" when I added a SOURCE? Also, I do also remember that some edits I made to a BVB page was because a while back, an IP changed the genre without any sources or discussion. I didn't know who it was. So I reverted it back. Like when an IP changed on the text "metalcore to hardcore" so I changed it back to "metalcore". When someone adds a genre that is sourced, or adds sources for the genre. You don't simply revert their edits, call them disruptive editing and pretend they didn't include any sources. I feel like they are being dishonest themselves and violating the Good faith guidelines or they simply just disagree with the genres. If you disagree with my genres, just take it to the discussion. Sorry about the unsourced edits. But seriously, what's bad about adding SOURCED genres? 123456sticks (talk) 01:32, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified sockpuppet of blocked user; now indefinitely blocked. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 03:43, 20 December 2013 (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.

Speedy deletion nomination of Attic Demos

Hello 123456sticks,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Attic Demos for deletion, because it seems to be an article that was created in violation of a block or ban. Content created by banned users will be deleted immediately.

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. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:44, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]