User talk:Dany4444

Welcome!

Hello, Dany4444! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Masssly (talk) 20:14, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

April 2014

Hello, Dany4444. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Indiggo, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Epeefleche (talk) 20:26, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did to Indiggo, without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Also -- please note, you cannot use other wikis as a ref -- they are not reliable sources. Epeefleche (talk) 20:32, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Indiggo may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

year with 5 compositions written for them by renowned European songwriters [Dieter Bohlen]], [[Thomas G:son]], [Philip Vella]] and [[Gerard James Borg]]. <ref>http://www.9am.ro/stiri-revista-presei/LifeStar/52430/Indiggo-

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:47, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Indiggo, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Epeefleche (talk) 21:57, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Indiggo, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. You continue to add original research, delete text supported by RSs (such as The New York Times), add text not supported by any text or supported by non-reliable sources, and edit in what appears to be a non-neutral manner, by apparently seeking to delete RS-supported material that is negative while adding non-RS-supported material that inflates the positive attributes of the two women and their parents. This is all especially troubling given that you are a single-purpose-account new user, and are editing an article that has suffered from some of the same editing by "other" editors. Epeefleche (talk) 22:47, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Indiggo may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Contest in Athen teilnehmen|publisher=Laut.de |date=February 14, 2006 |accessdate=March 25, 2014}}</ref> Singing the song "Be My Boyfriend" written by German songwriter [[Dieter Bohlen]] (which the
Company, but the TV station did not alter the standings.<ref name="eurovision1"/><ref>name="ziare1">{{cite web|url=http://www.ziare.com/eurovision/stiri-eurovision/contestatia-trupei-indiggo-a-fost-

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:07, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dany4444, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Dany4444! 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 peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Writ Keeper (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:07, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

indiggo

Hiya, I had a good look at all your contributions from a point of wp:agf and I was still of the position that your contributions were partly promotional and not supported by wp:rs so I have removed those and gone back to the last decent story - one issue you should be aware of is, the article subject has limited notability and is long term under deletion request, User talk:Epeefleche has worked hard to improve and keep this article and your low quality edits are negative to the articles continued publication, best thing you can do to keep the article is if you should just go away and allow neutral wiki editors to create the story - Mosfetfaser (talk) 22:17, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, I have done a lot of research and spent a couple of days on the Indiggo issue. I added new information and reputable sources that shed a truthful light on the Indiggo duo, highlighted the American stuff, and deleted things that are not significant and/or erroneous. What do you mean promotional? The fact that they played the lead parts in theatre musicals is promotional and so many other things? I noticed that there is a Romanian Wikipedia for Indiggo. Please, add the Romanian stuff to the Romanian wiki. In the American wiki, I thought that one has to point out the American accomplishments first which are plenty in Indiggo’s case.

I thought that wikipedia was a collaborative encyclopedia, edited collectively. Please, let’s do this together.

Please, keep my entries and my sources, because working on this subject, I realized that artists like Mihaela and Gabriela deserve to have a right Wikipedia. Dany4444 (talk) 16:51, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As I wrote above, "You continue to add original research, delete text supported by RSs (such as The New York Times), add text not supported by any text or supported by non-reliable sources, and edit in what appears to be a non-neutral manner, by apparently seeking to delete RS-supported material that is negative while adding non-RS-supported material that inflates the positive attributes of the two women and their parents. This is all especially troubling given that you are a single-purpose-account new user, and are editing an article that has suffered from some of the same editing by "other" editors.". The Romanian wiki may contain material it should not contain. Perhaps you even added that material to that article. The fact that it contains material does not mean it should be included here -- though perhaps it should be deleted there, if we look carefully. And, as I already told you, wikipedia is not an RS. --Epeefleche (talk) 17:01, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep all discussion on one pg. You just wrote on my page. Among other things, you said: "I have worked very hard on the wikipedia." You said that many times. So did other people. That doesn't count towards notability. Second, you argued that what the New York Times says should be deleted. It shouldn't. It's not "market gossip", as you say. It's what an RS says. As usual, you try to delete what an RS says, if it is not positive -- the same way you would if you were Indiggo itself, or theri father or mother. Third, material not cited to RSs is not appropriate. Fourth -- on them charting at 89, you don't get it ... the best rationale for keeping the article is that point. Next, a notable person -- Piers Morgan -- says something negative about Indiggo, reported in an RS, and you seek to delete it. Saying it is "badwilled." Again, that is not appropriate. And again, that makes you seem like the women themselves, or one of their parents.Epeefleche (talk) 17:18, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. 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, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
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. Epeefleche (talk) 17:04, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for helping me do this collectively. Regarding the statement "punching bags" my reply is the following: the fact that Kanye West is called bad names in the media and press is not posted on his wiki and it should not be posted on wikipedia because that does not reflect who he is as an artist. The fact that Taylor Swift was named a weak singer is nowhere posted on her wiki page and it should not. Because it is subjective and not fair to her hard work. No, I am not any of the twins' parents. I am a fan of Watch The Throne, African American music, pop and classical music and everything that has great melodies and lyrics. I am just a music lover. What kind of music do you like? Dany4444 (talk) 19:36, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's not how wikipedia works. When an RS such as The New York Times reports the subjective statement of the New York Times, it is appropriate to report it. It is a violation of wikipedia policy to delete it for your reason. And it is a violation of wikipedia policy for you to continue to delete it against the consensus of other editors, as you continue to do. And to continue to make other revisions against the consensus of other editors. You have received a final warning for all of this, but just have continued doing so.--Epeefleche (talk) 19:58, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for only being here to continually insert your own opinion based on original research and edit-warring against consensus, as you did at Indiggo. 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. Atama頭 03:25, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from the block template I've left above, I wanted to say a few things. First of all, I know that you are DavidLeib. You act and speak in exactly the same manner. I could block you as a sockpuppet, but since you seem to have abandoned the old account I'm cutting you some slack.

You have yet to make any contributions to the article's talk page. You must do so. Collaboration is an essential part of editing Wikipedia. If you are involved in a conflict the only proper way to resolve it is with discussion. People who refuse to discuss their arguments are blocked. So after this block expires, I urge you to make your case at the article's talk page. You may convince other editors to accept some or all of your desired changes to the article if your arguments are persuasive.

If you continue to behave the way you have been, I'll have to block both of your accounts indefinitely. And I warn you, do not edit under your old account, if you do I will block this account indefinitely as a sockpuppet account, and depending on your further conduct I may block your original account as well. -- Atama頭 20:50, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dany4444, this edit is exactly the kind of edit I blocked you for before. You're removing sourced information and justifying it with your opinion. That is not how Wikipedia works. We don't base our edits on our own beliefs and opinions, we base it on what we can verify with information from reliable sources. Don't continue this behavior or I will block you indefinitely. There is an active discussion on the talk page of the article, I suggest you join it instead of trying to remove information from the article that you simply don't like. -- Atama頭 23:29, 14 April 2014 (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).

Dany4444 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am sorry if my last edit produced any confusion. I am new and I am learning. I need your understanding and help. I only tried to provide a neutral point of view, according to wikipedia's policy. I am not trying to post my own opinion about Indiggo on America's Got Talent, but the true one and to keep the article classy. Please, watch the NY audition: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rD55N0e1his Judge Piers Morgan never made that comment about Indiggo, moreover he approved the pair to go further into the competition saying that he started enjoying the act, but anyhow, since only a comment of one judge is allowed by you, no comments should be posted at all. I tried to quote Sharon Osbourne who praised the twin artists, because her opinion matters. She is a music manager and a classy lady. Judge Piers Morgan's attitude towards Indiggo was racist. Please, unblock me because I would like to contribute to other pages as well and become a better editor. I am a fighter for justice and hard work. I will be more attentive next time. I am learning from you. Dany4444 (talk) 23:26, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You're still arguing that you were right and the rest were wrong. You were blocked for NPOV violations, and you keep making them right here. Drmies (talk) 00:50, 25 April 2014 (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.

Those are nice words. But you were communicated with a great deal about this, including on this page, and continued to be disruptive. Ignoring all communications. Your words are "I only tried to provide a neutral point of view." Your repeated edits indicated precisely the opposite -- that you were intent on deleting RS refs and RS-supported text if it reflected negatively on the twins, and intent on adding non-RS information that reflected positively on them. The fact that you above again incorrectly indicate that you were trying to provide a "neutral point of view" shows that you are not to be trusted with further editing. What you did was nothing of the kind. You edited with the same POV edits one might have applied if they were the twins themselves, or one of their parents. The disruption was severe. Furthermore, as a sysop indicated above, you are a sockpuppet. Epeefleche (talk) 23:59, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Epeefleche (talk), Please, stop threatening me. I am not a sock puppet as you continue naming me. Wikipedia is a collaborative work and should reflect the accomplishments of an artist, and of course, have a neutral point of view. Am I being disruptive trying to rectify a false info and shedding a neutral point of view? If you think that wikipedia should not have a neutral point of view, perhaps this is because you are friends with Piers Morgan and thus you are a sock puppet and you should leave this page. Why do you continue ignoring what I am pointing out? I asked you to see the NY audition for yourself and to see that Piers Morgan never made that comment. You can not post a comment which is false or taken out of the context. The press did the same thing: they taken some words out of the context. Why do you ignore what Sharon Osbourne stated about the twins? Piers Morgan is a compromised figure. Why don't you go and edit his wikipedia and add that over 100,000 people signed a petition for his deporting from the US?

I also started analyzing other artists's wikipedias. There are dozens of articles on Taylor Swift which name her a "bad singer" and that "she sang out of tune on the New Year's Eve performance" and yet I have seen none of those statements on her wikipedia. Why don't you go edit Taylor Swift's wikipedia and add those statements? What you are doing in the case of Indiggo is unfair and revolting. Who are you to change the rules? I noticed that anyone who tried to add something fair and favorable was being threatened or blocked, just like I was. I would also like to add what Sony BMG stated about the twins "that they are plentifully blessed with musical talent" as well as what the President of Imagem stated about them: that "their talent and drive was recognized by Swizz Beatz, Jay-Z, Kanye West". I think these artists' opinion matter more than one of Piers Morgan's kinds. Dany4444 (talk) 18:56, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't help. Epeefleche (talk) 06:08, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, this doesn't help your case. Epeefleche (talk) 06:09, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]