User talk:DangerousWomanAri

Welcome!

Hello, DangerousWomanAri, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions so far. I hope you like it here! Here are a few important links for newcomers:

Wikipedia:Reliable sources, Wikipedia:CITE, WP:V and WP:NPOV
How to edit a page; How to develop articles; Editing tutorial
Manual of Style; Writing better articles
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Editing by consensus – working well with other Wikipedians

If you'd like some help with editing or otherwise, you can sign up at the new users log, post a question at the Help Desk, or ask me on my talk page.

Please sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. It is a good idea to read the most recent entries at the bottom of the Talk page of an existing article before making major changes to it, to see if your proposed change has been discussed before. Before I make a major change to an article, I often make a proposal on the Talk page to see if anyone minds.

Again, welcome! -- Ssilvers (talk) 10:01, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DangerousWomanAri, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi DangerousWomanAri! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Worm That Turned (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

June 2016

Welcome to Wikipedia.

What Sidetosice (talk) 17:56, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

Some guidelines relevant to recent edits

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some helpful guidelines for newcomers:

WP:V: If you add information to this encyclopedia, please add sources that verify the information. See WP:V and WP:RS for more information.
WP:LEAD: Lead sections should contain an overview/summary of the most important facts that are described in greater detail below.
WP:BRD: This describes the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle -- Generally, if you boldly make a change to an article, and another editor reverts your change, then you should begin a discussion on that article's Talk page, where all the editors interested in the article can participate in building a WP:CONSENSUS. Please note that whether Grande should be described as a "songwriter" in the infobox has been discussed and rejected before on the article's Talk page. However, if you think that she should be, feel free to start a new discussion on the article's talk page.

All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 08:41, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Per the above, the below and this subsequent edit, please don't just try and force in the information you want. The article's talk page is there to discuss disputed changes, and you really should head there to discuss your changes. Please also note that leaving edit summaries "do not change" is not helpful. Anyone's text can and may be changed, altered, re-edited, moved or deleted: that is enshrined in our policies and guidelines and is something you should respect. I look forward to seeing you on the talk page to discuss the changes you would like to see made. - SchroCat (talk) 10:28, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously? Another revert? That is the third time you have tried to put that information on the page in 7 hours. Are you actually reading all the advice that is being given to you, that you have to use talk page to discuss matters, rather than just force things to go your way? I'm not sure your Wiki career is going to last terribly long if you continue along these lines. - SchroCat (talk) 10:40, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Jim1138. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Into You (Ariana Grande song)— 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. Jim1138 (talk) 03:35, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at One Dance, you may be blocked from editing. Jim1138 (talk) 03:39, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistent vandalism. 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 first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. HighInBC ^{Need help? {{ping|HighInBC}}} 03:41, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Since you decided to add childish profanity to our article, and remove sources, and introduce intentional errors. I have blocked you for 1 week.

You just got off a block. The level of disruption you are causing compared to your contributions is not acceptable. If this carries on after this block has expired you are likely to be blocked indefinitely. HighInBC ^{Need help? {{ping|HighInBC}}} 03:43, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. 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/DangerousWomanAri, 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. Sro23 (talk) 06:20, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sro23 (talk) 06:20, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for a period of indefinite for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DangerousWomanAri. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Vanjagenije (talk) 10:19, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]