User talk:Davebrayfb

July 2012

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is invited to contribute, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Nickelodeon, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. Mdann52 (talk) 16:26, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:DNA Productions logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:DNA Productions logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:44, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not replace pages with blank content, as you did with this edit to Otis the Cow, as this is confusing to readers. The page's content has been restored for now. If there is a problem with the page, it should be edited or reverted to a previous version if possible; if you think the page should be removed entirely, see further information. Thank you. Mephistophelian (talk) 18:39, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Super Mario Bros. 2. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.

If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place "{{helpme}}" on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Super Mario Bros. 2 was changed by Davebrayfb (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.868368 on 2012-08-07T14:01:17+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 14:01, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:New Super Mario Bros U European box.png)

Thanks for uploading File:New Super Mario Bros U European box.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:34, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mario Kart U for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mario Kart U is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mario Kart U until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. JetBlast (talk) 19:17, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nick.com move

I undid your move to Nick.co.uk. Any such move should be discussed first on the article's Talk page. This one was particularly inappropriate given that the article is about "Nick.com" and not "Nick.co.uk". Please don't move or rename articles in the future without first gaining consensus for the move on the article Talk page. Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 14:06, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay Davebrayfb (talk) 14:16, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Davebrayfb. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! JohnInDC (talk) 14:41, 23 September 2012 (UTC) JohnInDC (talk) 14:41, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

General tips

Here are a few other things you should keep in mind - first, use the Show Preview button on the edit page to make sure your edits have the intended effect. I found two of your edits (one to Dora and one to Madeleine) that introduced, rather than solved, problems. Second, be sure to use an edit summary to say what your edit has just done. Other editors find that very useful. Finally, be sure to supply a source for your edits. Wikipedia isn't a collection of what its editors happen to know but rather is a restatement of what reliable sources have had to say about the subject at hand. Review the links above in the welcome message to get a better sense of things. JohnInDC (talk) 14:47, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Mario Kart 7 European box art.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Mario Kart 7 European box art.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:29, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Mario Kart 7 European box art.png

A tag has been placed on File:Mario Kart 7 European box art.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Mdann52 (talk) 10:08, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Mario Kart 7 European box art.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Mario Kart 7 European box art.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Mdann52 (talk) 10:09, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adding unsourced information at Peppa Pig

Hello, I'm John. I noticed that you made a change to an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. --John (talk) 18:18, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 2012

Hello, I'm O.Koslowski. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made to Rugrats, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, O.Koslowski (talk) 15:13, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please make sure to include an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! JohnInDC (talk) 02:07, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dave, a very high percentage of your edits are being reverted as unsourced or hard to follow or in some cases flat-out wrong. This whole Super Mario kerfluffle is a good example. You seem to be trying to improve the encyclopedia but you're failing in the task if other editors have to trail behind you cleaning up messes you leave. You need to start paying closer attention to what you're doing, making only sound, sourced edits - and start right now. Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 15:04, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just trying to say Mario is not an American Davebrayfb (talk) 19:22, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are insisting that an character with an Italian name, whose creator sets him in NY City, is not a "fictional American character of Italian descent". Three times, in the face of reversions by other editors who provide at least a source, and without any of the times taking it up on the Talk page. Maybe he's going back on the next boat and is therefore not, in fact, American but it needs to be discussed. You can't just put things in that you believe to be true. You need sources; and you need to discuss your changes with other editors. JohnInDC (talk) 20:03, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Mario. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

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. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
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.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in you being blocked from editing. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 07:43, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop moving articles without discussion

As the header says. I've noted this problem before. If you have an issue with the title of an established article, please take it up on the Talk page before moving and / or renaming it. Continuing to make such moves may constitute disruptive editing and may get you blocked. Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 00:18, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another place to discuss proposed moves is here: WP:Move requests. JohnInDC (talk) 13:19, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adding the "Good" designation to SpongeBob SquarePants

Dave, there's an elaborate process for designating an article as "Good", set forth at Wikipedia:Good_articles. You can't just add the tag to articles you like, as you appear to have done with this edit.

I am growing very concerned about your edits - the addition of unsourced content; idiosyncratic and undiscussed moves; and now this. I think you need to slow down, take it easy, and for now confine yourself to well-sourced, well-explained and completely proper edits. When you venture beyond those, the results are too uncertain. Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 21:09, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not bad article Davebrayfb (talk) 07:30, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dave, that is not a meaningful response. Please. You need to study the introductory articles listed in the Welcome message above and gain a better understanding of how Wikipedia works, and how to edit responsibly. Things can't continue this way. JohnInDC (talk) 10:56, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As I reflect on this some more, I think the very best thing you could do - and I think for now you should do it without exception - is to propose edits you'd like to make on the article Talk page before you make them. That way you can lay out your reasoning for the edit, and other editors - if the edit seems problematic in some fashion - can explain their concerns to you. As far as I can tell, you've never discussed any edit on any article Talk page. I think that would be a good way to learn what edits are sound and proper, and which ones aren't - and why. How about it? JohnInDC (talk) 16:08, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 2012

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to Teletubbies does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! JohnInDC (talk) 20:53, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please review article Talk pages and participate there before making edits

Dave - I suggested above that your edits might be sounder, and be more likely to avoid reversion by other editors, if before making them you were to discuss them on the article Talk pages. So far you haven't chosen to do so, so let me offer up two examples when it would have saved you, and other editors, a bit of headache. The first was on the page Mario, when you repeatedly removed references to the character's being "American", supporting your change only with edit summaries to the effect that "he's not American". The matter had already been discussed on the article's Talk page, and apparently resolved. That would be the place to register your disagreement with the conclusion, and not through an edit that you made, and which was reverted, three times. Second, you've twice changed Bubble Guppies to be a "Canadian-American" series. This characterization was also taken up on the Talk page, with "Canadian" removed; if you have a new perspective on that discussion, take it up there (as I now have). Don't simply make an edit to conform with your opinion, and then make it again when it's reverted.

I am sorry if I seem too persistent to you with these many warnings and short essays but your editing continues to be problematic and I am trying to help you improve it. If it doesn't improve, I'm afraid that sooner or later you will find yourself blocked. Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 16:28, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just saying that season 2 of bubble guppies is made in canada.

Yes. I know that. Discuss it at the Talk page, not here. JohnInDC (talk) 18:03, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 2012

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Avatar: The Last Airbender. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article.
If you are going to add that a program has won an Emmy award then you need to add a source for it - particularly when the only mention in the article is of an Emmy "nomination". Dave, your editing continues to be sloppy and disruptive and unless it improves these warnings are going to escalate. JohnInDC (talk) 17:05, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I added an image to the aka cartoon page :D 17:28, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you did. I left that in place. I am instead concerned about your addition of information to that article that is at worst, untrue, and at best, unsourced. JohnInDC (talk) 17:30, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ANI discussion

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. JohnInDC (talk) 18:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This link goes directly to the discussion: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Apparent_competence_issue. JohnInDC (talk) 18:07, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of redirect at A.k.a. Cartoon

I restored the redirect that you removed without discussion. There had been a merger proposal. In an earlier edit you unilaterally removed the merger template without checking the discussion or informing anyone what you were doing. I restored the merger template, whereupon another editor with better knowledge of the article's history restored the redirect, which apparently had been put in place in 2011 and later removed without reason by an IP editor. This sequence of events is abundantly clear from the edit summaries. JohnInDC (talk) 12:05, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I accidently removed the merge template 12:56, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, you replaced it with other text that made it clear that you regarded the merger issue as resolved, but that aside - if you want to discuss the reasons for the merge and redirect, this Talk page would be the place to do it. The link is directly to the original merger discussion: Talk:Danny_Antonucci#Merge_proposal. JohnInDC (talk) 13:22, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits

Hi Dave.

You really ought to respond at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Apparent_competence_issue because administrators are discussing your work. i'm sure you don't mean any harm to the encyclopedia but there are are just too many things you're not getting quite right. It would be a pity if you end up being told to stop editing, but you need to do something. before it comes to this. You may wish to check out our excellent programme for helping new editors at Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user. If you have any further questions don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page.

Regards, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:08, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. JohnInDC (talk) 00:01, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. 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 below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

--John (talk) 18:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 2012

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 17:09, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fred:The show is not ended and you did not leave a summary behind you.Season 1 is finished but they are going to make a second season.

ANI Notice

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. JohnInDC (talk) 17:27, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Fifi and the Flowertots shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Nobody Ent 11:28, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please come and discuss your edits at AN/I

Hello there, as you can see from the posts above your editing style is being discussed in this thread at the Administrators' Notice Board/Incidents. There is a concern that your editing contributions - and particularly your reluctance to discuss them or respond to feedback - are becoming disruptive. Please will you respond at the thread I linked above within the next two days. As I say, your reluctance to discuss your edits is now becoming a bit of a problem so please take this request seriously; if we don't hear from you there is a possibility you may be blocked from editing. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 11:43, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Concur. When multiple administrators drop by to have you explain yourself, and you have already been blocked once for your editing behaviour, you should know that it's a good time to start a discussion (✉→BWilkins←✎) 13:27, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I eagerly await your next edit. By now you will have read these messages, and should have read the ANI report. If your next edit is NOT to explain your editing behaviour either here OR at ANI, then you will likely find yourself intefinitely blocked until you are willing/able to explain why you continued to edit without consensus, outside of the manual of style, and without communicating with others (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:39, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We're still waiting. You merely addressed one aspect of the extensive problems with your editing and behaviour (and it was a poor explanation at that). You should not be editing Wikipedia until you have addressed the entire range of concerns. If you're not willing to discuss - and assure the community that such behaviours will not continue - then we will have no choice but to prevent the issues by blocking. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:54, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dave, I spoke to you once before above but you ignored it. You've been very lucky so far - we don't usually discuss a disruptive editor three times at the the Administrators' Noticeboard without finally stopping them indefinitely from editing this encyclopedia. Please, please, read what Bwilkins has said because we are going to be looking at every one of your new edits from now on. If you want to continue editing , do consider getting help as I suggested at our adoption scheme. Also, if it applies, please read Guidance for younger editors - there's some good advice in there too. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:05, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ahem, What do you mean "Guidance for younger editors" I'm not under aged (Me, Davebrayfb logged out — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.46.247.177 (talk) 18:06, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kudpung stated that it may apply, not that it does. Also, why are you logged out if you can still edit your talk page logged in like before? That could get you blocked for block evasion. Zappa O Mati 23:42, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Hello there, I'm sorry to have had to do this but I have blocked you until you are willing to properly discuss your editing style and seek some help in improving what you are doing. After all the discussion referenced above you subsequently made these edits which have caused further damage, introducing mis-spellings and removing necessary links. I'm imposing a block with no specific time limit (please note this does NOT mean it is permanent!) The block will end when you can convince us that you understand what has been going wrong and have taken steps to improve things. Please reply here either by editing the block template as instructed, or if you can't work out how to do this by just adding a reply here on the talk page. Note to other admins: I'm happy for you to unblock if you see a convincing rationale, no need to consult me. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 08:58, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for Unwillingness to discuss or modify disruptive editing style.. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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).

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

Request reason:

I won't do Disruptive editing anymore and I know understand what I'm doing wrong and I won't do it again and some of the edits I made are mistakes and it won't happen again and I will make non vandal edits and I really wanna discuss some articles i am following.Davebrayfb (talk) 12:28, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I think we need a bit more convinging than that is able to do. Can you explain why some of your edits were wrong, and what you should have done instead? And please tell us what sort of editing you plan to do if you are unblocked. Peridon (talk) 14:44, 27 October 2012 (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.

Okay,but I always seem to remove a template like that Davebrayfb (talk) 16:23, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

...and that's part of the problem (✉→BWilkins←✎) 16:30, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But I don't even know I move them D: Davebrayfb (talk) 16:35, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hence my link above to the concept that competence is required. If you cannot tell you're moving/deleting/creating major errors on box that's 3" high on your screen, then we have some major issues (✉→BWilkins←✎) 16:37, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's precisely the point, Dave. if you don't know what you're doing, you shouldn't be doing it. Your biggest mistake however, was not taking any notice of the warnings and friendly advice while you had a chance. Now you can take a vacation from Wikipedia, read over this talk page thoroughly and try to understand what you were doing wrong. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:46, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then I'll learn it Davebrayfb (talk) 18:06, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is going to be one of those cases where you will have absolute need of a WP:MENTOR. You have a desire to edit, but cannot recognize how or why your edits are hazardous to the project. See WP:ADOPT. You will not be able to post on their talkpage, but you should be able to e-mail someone who would appear to be an appropriate adopter. I'm sorry, but I cannot recommend an unblock until you have been adopted, and have promised to not edit this project until you have gone through some appropriate training. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:31, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You say "I know understand what I'm doing wrong", but you haven't actually said what that is. Unfortunately, unless you tell us what you think you did wrong, and how you will act differently in the future, we have no way of knowing whether you really do understand. You will need to give a clearer explanation if you are to have a reasonable chance of being unblocked. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:22, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption response

Hello Davebrayfb. I am EagerToddler and I noticed you posted a "request for adoption" template on your userpage. Admittedly I've never fully adopted another user before, although I have helped at least one other user with some editing issues on wikipedia. If you need assistance feel free to check with me and I'll be willing to help in whatever way possible. I notice you have been blocked indefinitely from editing wikipedia because of disruptive editing. I also note the comments from other editors suggesting that you lack adequate competency with regards to correct editing practices. I am willing to help if needed. You may respond by editing under this section on your talk page as I realize you won't be able to contact me on mine. i've added your talk page to my watchlist so I'll be able to view subsequent edits that are made here. All the best. EagerToddler39 (talk) 04:58, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I do need help Davebrayfb (talk) 11:55, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dave, if you are accepting the assistance from User:EagerToddler39, then I will unblock with the following conditions:

you will follow their mentoring tools, projects, suggestions, and requests
you will not edit live articles unless the edit(s) have been approved by your mentor
you may discuss any changes on article talkpages without limitation
the above restrictions are for a period of 30 days, unless extension is suggested by your mentor

Do you accept? (✉→BWilkins←✎) 14:24, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do Davebrayfb (talk) 15:06, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

Yes I do Davebrayfb

Accept reason:

Editor has accepted adoption, and will abide by the following:

you will follow their mentoring tools, projects, suggestions, and requests
you will not edit live articles unless the edit(s) have been approved by your mentor
you may discuss any changes on article talkpages without limitation
the above restrictions are for a period of 30 days, unless extension is suggested by your mentor (✉→BWilkins←✎) 15:25, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for flagratly violating the unblock conditions you accepted earlier today. Wikipedia as a community is about TRUST. You were trusted to follow through, yet you immediately went back to the same types of edits. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 18:48, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good grief Dave, when you agreed to the stipulation "you will not edit live articles unless the edit(s) have been approved by your mentor" what did you think that meant? Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 19:04, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can see that I'm just gonna get blocked all the time so i'm gonna log out for a really really long time Davebrayfb (talk) 19:14, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Be sure not to resume editing, logged out, as you did here. That is forbidden while you're blocked. JohnInDC (talk) 19:17, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dave, that was the deal: if you broke the conditions we agreed to, you were going to be blocked. What else did you think would happen? (✉→BWilkins←✎) 22:15, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mentorship

Hello Davebrayfb, I notice that you were unblocked on condition that you accept mentorship and then reblocked because you did not abide by the stipulations of the initial unblock. Could you work with me for at least a week to work on the issues that have arisen on your talk page so that you can resume constructive editing on wikipedia. I know it must be frustrating trying to contribute yet meeting obstacles along the way. I would recommend that you identify an article that you wish to edit and we'll discuss the changes you wish to make and how to make them right here on your talk page, before any articles are edited. In addition I would like to review some of wikipedia's guidelines with you as it appears that you have not read through the multiple material that have been recommended by other editors attempting to help you.EagerToddler39 (talk) 20:26, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've reviewed the last edit you made under an ip address to Talk:The New Adventures of Madeline. I realize that you are impassioned about the Canadian connection of the series. You keep belabouring your point without pointing editors to a source that supports your position. The arguments proposed and supported by the other editors who have comment hold weight. If you are that insistent on the series being labelled as Canadian I recommend you do adequate research on google or elsewhere for a reliable source. Then you are free to recommend this edit to other contributors along with the reliable source found.EagerToddler39 (talk) 20:33, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.bcdb.com/cartoons/Other_Studios/C/CINAR_Animation/Madeline/index.html.It says they have CINAR and DiC version Davebrayfb (talk) 21:07, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

After considerable research I am seeing some credence to your position, however the site you gave cannot be used as a source to support the Canadian connection of the series. It appears that Cinar was involved in the production of the first television specials (not series) according to this source (The source I found may not be reliable enough to cite on the article page. I copied this from that site:

The show basically features the adventures of Madeline, her friends, Miss Clavel and Pepito. Each episode spots them going on adventure, and an original song. The original "Madeline" was a production from 1952 that was shown as an animated opener in movie theaters. The next 6 were television specials that were the work of Cinar animation. "Madeline" was picked up as a regular series in 1993 on The Family Channel. Production of episodes was moved to DiC studios.

Cinar produced "five 1/2 hour musical animated TV specials" which are completely different from the regular series that began to be produced by DiC in 1993. At best you could produce that a section is added to the Madeline article, where the television special is inserted. If that is okay with you I could leave this information on the talk page of the article for it to be discussed further and then a consensus reached. Please remember not to edit using an ip once your account is still blocked.EagerToddler39 (talk) 21:42, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because Cinar and DiC merged in, I think 2008, it's easy to confound who did what & when. Cinar could today sensibly claim credit for something actually created in the US pre-merger; and a less than meticulous reader could miss the distinction too. But neither makes the production "Canadian". The point is that just finding something saying "This is credited to Cinar" doesn't necessarily answer the question. JohnInDC (talk) 02:43, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know that I did do a lot of distruptive edit's but did I really need to be blocked for ever ? Davebrayfb (talk) 19:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And please tell me what a mentor is and how do I know what appeals to it!? Davebrayfb (talk) 19:38, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should be aware of what a mentor was, because you agreed to having one. You made a promise to not make edits to articles until your mentor said they were ok, and then you immediately broke that promise, which means you can't be trusted. You were given many chances to change your behavior and you simply refused to do so. As a result you're blocked indefinitely, because your actions have hurt the quality of articles and it appears your fellow editors have given up trying to help you. Sorry if this is painful to hear, but these are the consequences for your actions. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 20:21, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

June 2013

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Mario Kart U, to Wikipedia, as doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Wikipedia:Your first article; you might also consider using the Article Wizard. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. DarkToonLink (talk) 22:29, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Unblock

OK, I know my previous edits in the past weren't that helpful, and they have caused problems, but I now have improved my grammar and I am much more mature, I will only make edits helpful and edits that will violate any rules, I know it has been a while since I have been on Wikipedia, but I now think I will be a much better editor, I will understand if this request will not be accepted.Davebrayfb (talk)

If you would like to make an unblock request, you would need to use the {{Unblock}} template. NFLisAwesome ^{(ZappaOMati's alternate account)} 20:43, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~If you don't mind, I've set up the Unblock template for you. NFLisAwesome ^{(ZappaOMati's alternate account)} 20:45, 26 March 2014 (UTC)~~[reply]

Request for 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).

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

Request reason:

OK, I know my previous edits in the past weren't that helpful, and they have caused problems, but I now have improved my grammar and I am much more mature, I will only make edits helpful and edits that will violate any rules, I know it has been a while since I have been on Wikipedia, but I now think I will be a much better editor, I will understand if this request will not be accepted.Davebrayfb (talk)

Decline reason:

Since you have not responded to the query below, I am closing this unblock request. If you make another unblock request, please make sure you respond to the messages below. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:02, 22 May 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.

The blocking administrator is willing to see you unblocked, subject to the same conditions as for the last unblock. That means having a mentor again. I have asked EagerToddler39 if he/she is willing to take on that role again. If so, it should be possible to unblock you soon. If not, we will have to try to find another mentor. Can you please post a message here saying that you will accept the same conditions as were given last time. (Those conditions are listed above, in the post by BWilkins at 14:24, 28 October 2012.) The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:44, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, EagerToddler39 has indicated that he or she is no longer willing to undertake an adoption. If you like, I can post an {{Adopt me}} tag on your talk page, in the hope of attracting another adopter. Let me know if you would like me to do so. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 07:10, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]