User talk:DavidPlayzYT

DavidPlayzYT, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi DavidPlayzYT! 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 Rosiestep (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Another Small Step (ROBLOX Movie (January 14)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Theroadislong was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Theroadislong (talk) 18:11, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021

Thank you for your contributions. One of your recent contributions to Spider-Man: No Way Home has been reverted or removed, because it contains speculative or unconfirmed information about a future event. Please only add material about future events if it is verifiable, based on a reliable source. InfiniteNexus (talk) 15:58, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Spider-Man: No Way Home. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:06, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to move pages to bad titles contrary to naming conventions or consensus, as you did at Disney Cruise Line, you may be blocked from editing. Any article name change needs consensus, not the arbitrary action of a single editor. If you have citations that indicate the line's official name and common name are "Disney Cruise Line Fleet", please provide them in the article talk page and begin discussion with other editors. -- McDoob AU93 18:50, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:Philip Sugarman. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 16:18, 8 May 2021 (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 Wikipedia:Teahouse, you may be blocked from editing. Theroadislong (talk) 16:37, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make unexplained changes to information on Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:Teahouse.

Theroadislong (talk) 16:45, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of SpaceTaskForce

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, SpaceTaskForce, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Theroadislong (talk) 16:19, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse

Hello DavidPlayzYT. I appreciate your enthusiasm but you do not yet have the experience or the knowledge to be a Teahouse host. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:55, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DavidPYT It's unusual for another person to edit someone's userpage, but you have added false and very misleading information to yours, which I felt it appropriate to remove so as not to confuse other editors. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:24, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep editing DavidPlayzYT

I don't want you to quit Wikipedia entirely. You can still help. Just don't add fake info to your userpage and make sure you are answering questions in the Teahouse with certainty that they are the right answers.TigerScientist Chat 16:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to San Mateo-Foster City School District. –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 22:35, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 16:36, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why blocked

adding content to articles without references, or with attempts at references that are not considered reliable sources (naming a student is not a reliable source reference)
when those additions reverted (reversed) making the same changes again (edit warring) rather than starting a discussion on the article Talk pages
attempting to give advice at Teahouse, a role reserved for experienced editors - the Teahouse hosts
you put false information on your User page: that you had been awarded various Teahouse badges, and that you were an Articles for Creation reviewer

If you truly want to remain as a Wikipedia editor, you need to submit an appeal in the above section, with clear, specific explanations of what your errors were, and that you will not repeat them if reinstated. You can't just promise to do it right going forward; you needs to be specific. David notMD (talk) 02:33, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify what David notMD said above: anyone can answer questions at the Teahouse, and doing so without being signed up as a host isn't a reason, per se, for blocking someone. But Competence is Required, and your overall editing pattern probably suggested you are not here to contribute constructively. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:53, 11 May 2021 (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).

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

Request reason:

I really dont get why I am blocked. I did have a past of disruptive editing, and I got warned, at the same time I got warned for lying in Teahouse, when I was not lying, just saying what I thought was the solution. My ban, was because I got a warn from editing a school district saying lies, when I just put some info about a school, and put my reference. This is becoming really confusing for me. DavidPlayzYT (talk) 17:09, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

At the risk of just repeating what David notMD and Nick Moyes said above - before this unblock request - You're new (acceptable), and making mistakes (understandable). But you're also being way too bold (not good when you don't know what you're doing; everything you do is being reverted, which is no good for you, and no good for us); posting a lot of information based on your own knowledge (not acceptable, per WP:V), answering questions from other people at the Teahouse (not acceptable, you're still far too new to give advice, and some of it was wrong - it does no one any good to "try your best" answering questions you don't know the answer to); leaving pointless messages (unhelpful), again adding your own unverified knowledge about your school (after being previously warned not to), and... joking about suicide (deeply unacceptable). I'm at a loss as to what you could say that would convince me that you can be a productive, collaborative editor here. But now that the reason for your block has been expanded, if you honestly think you can create another unblock request that clearly and convincingly addresses this large range of issues, you can do so. But I fear it's going to be a while before you're a good fit here; a few years of maturing will do wonders. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:08, 11 May 2021 (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.

Floquenbeam (talk) So does this mean I am banned forever? If yes I will just fully delete my account as I see nobody supports me trying to be helpful here. DavidPlayzYT (talk) 15:02, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, half of your accusations are lies. So I'd rather make a new account, then stick with an account that is blocked because somebody was lying.

You are not allowed to make a new account while this one is blocked; the block is on the person, not the account. See WP:EVADE. No, I don't think you're banned forever, but yes, I think you're probably blocked for a few years, until you can show you're more reasonable and responsible than you're being now. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:05, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, it says that I can only try to appeal once, and if that gets declined, Im banned forever. I had a thing a few weeks ago with disruptive edting. I stopped that. When I tried to be helpful, I got banned. So I request to be unbanned, because I was banned beause of my past, not the future. If I dont get unbanned I may,and will sue wikipedia for banning people for false reasons. DavidPlayzYT (talk) 16:34, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Legal threats

Your recent edits could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 16:36, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Because of your legal threat, I have withdrawn your talk page access. If you want to appeal, read Wikipedia:Unblock Ticket Request System. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:43, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:DavidPlayzYT/sandbox/Another Small Step (ROBLOX Movie

Hello, DavidPlayzYT. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "sandbox/Another Small Step (ROBLOX Movie".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:23, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]