User talk:Alwayslookonthebrightside11

May 2020

Hello, I'm I dream of horses. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Amber Agar—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. I dream of horses (talk page) (Contribs) Remember to notify me after replying off my talk page. 01:07, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Amber Agar. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. -- LuK3 (Talk) 01:09, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are putting false information on this page

The name is spelt wrong for a start and you keep reverting it

The date of birth is wrong too

This is Amber's agent stop this now and be respectful

Sockpuppet investigation

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/193.138.218.206, 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.

Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 01:17, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your disruptive editing habits

Hello. I have just blocked your Ip address (User:193.138.218.206) for disruptive editing, and I will do the same to this one if you choose not to work with us. Bear in mind we have no idea who you are, so saying you're Amber Agar's agent means nothing to us. Had you simply gone to the Talk Page at Talk:Amber Agar and politely expressed your concerns over wrong information in an article, you would have been listened to. Or you could have placed an {{edit request}} there. We would have politely asked you to link to any reliably published sources (not ImDB, as that is user-edited) and shown us exactly what words need changing. Sadly, you decided you owned this article (see WP:OWN) and, by constantly trying to change it without proper supporting material, you (as an IP editor) became an utterly disruptive presence here. If you are genuinely her agent, you have done her no service whatsoever, and I have placed a block on your IP address for a while so as to slow down that disruption.

We are always happy to change article titles per WP:COMMON NAME, and sources like this suggest you may have a point, whoever you may be. (But this one from RADA tells the opposite story.) But that's irrelevant against the disruption your approach has caused. I won't at this time block this newly registered account that I see you made prior to me blocking your IP address, but your approach to working with other editors had better change fast, or this one will get blocked too if you won't work with us. Because you have now registered an account, I require the IP address not to make any further edits once it's unblocked, and that you stick to just this registered account for any editing from hereon in. See also WP:COI and WP:PAID for two important policies that you will need to read and follow before attempting to edit that article again.

The bottom line is that you must declare your conflict of interest according to the guidance you will find at this link: WP:COI. Then you are obliged by our editing policy to also declare paid editing (see WP:PAID) how to make that disclosure. Then you need to go to the article talk page and clearly explain, point by point, precisely what concerns you have in the article. Provide links to reliable published sources) to support every suggested change you would like to see made, or tell us of anything that is grossly wrong or inappropriate to have on Wikipedia. We will remove it. But continue to be disruptive or make legal threats, and we will remove you instead. We have 6 million articles here, and we simply cannot afford to have 6 million gung-ho anonymous people believing they have the right to storm in and disruptively edit any article they like, and to continue doing so when they're clearly told to stop. Work with us, not against us, please. Nick Moyes (talk) 02:01, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alwayslookonthebrightside11. Aside from echoing everything that Nick said, I also want to mention that as the representative of a subject of an article, advice for contacting Wikipedians can be found here: Wikipedia:Contact us/Article subjects – in particular, if you need someone to email about a serious problem, you can contact info-en-qwikimedia.org. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 02:36, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]