User talk:Baraniscool

Welcome!

Hello, Baraniscool, 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:

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. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

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! - FlightTime (open channel) 16:37, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

Hello, I'm FlightTime. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Meddle, 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 referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. - FlightTime (open channel) 16:37, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Baraniscool! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Atom Heart Mother several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Atom Heart Mother, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. Tarhalindur (talk) 17:08, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Astronomy Domine. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Please don't capitalise descriptive terms such as "album version" or "live version". These terms are not titles. Binksternet (talk) 06:01, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Meddle. - FlightTime (open channel) 18:44, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Seamus (song). - FlightTime (open channel) 19:16, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Xander Mobus. Binksternet (talk) 16:05, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for disruptive page moves. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:13, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Birth dates

Hi. I wanted to explain why I reverted a change you made to Xander Mobus. In this edit, you added a birth date, but you didn't cite a reliable source. Wikipedia has strict rules on content in biographies of living persons because this can impact real peoples' lives. Please be aware that many sites on the internet purport to give information about celebrities, but few of them of reliable. Sites like the IMDb use user-generated content, and they should not be cited in biographical articles. Similarly, celebrity gossip websites should not be used because most of them don't have a history of fact checking or publishing corrections. Fan sites and blogs are self-published and have no editorial control. We also can't use primary documents, such as government birth databases or genealogical websites (which are also typically user-generated, as above). This means that the number of available sources is quite slim, and we often have to either go without this information or wait until a source like Entertainment Weekly or the BBC publishes an interview that includes a birth date. If you're not sure whether a source is reliable, you can ask at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:08, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pink Floyd articles

Please stop adding "the" before English rock band, it is not grammatically correct. - FlightTime (open channel) 16:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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 Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Summer '68, you may be blocked from editing. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:04, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at If (Pink Floyd song). - FlightTime (open channel) 21:08, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.- FlightTime (open channel) 21:12, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for persistent addition of unsourced content and a complete lack of communication when concerns have been raised. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:18, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 15:01, 23 December 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

Because i didn't know that i wasn't allowed to abuse multiple accounts to edit pages and i didn't know that it was grammaticly incorrect to add "the" before english rock band. I didn't intentionaly do anything bad, i just was nieve and i would like to say sorry.Baraniscool (talk) 09:18, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You clearly did know about your inappropriate edits, having been warned about them over and over again. That you set up another account to continue deliberately disrupting the project gives me no hope you'd be constructive if unblocked. Yamla (talk) 10:31, 24 December 2023 (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.

No need to ping me. A different admin will review your unblock request shortly. --Yamla (talk) 17:55, 24 December 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

please, i'm just a teenager who didn't know better. If if i knew the rules, i wouldn't be abusing multiple accounts.I'm so sorry and i promise i won't do it again.@Yamla:Baraniscool (talk) 17:42, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I concur with Yamla; I might have bought the idea that you simply didn't know had you not created another account. That's a deliberate action. If you are a teenager, then you lack the maturity needed to participate here, and you should wait a long time before requesting unblock- maybe college-age. 331dot (talk) 17:59, 24 December 2023 (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.