User talk:Dcelano

Editing Wikipedia

Your Wikipedia edits lack both edit summaries and references. Before you contribute again to Wikipedia, please consider reading Help:Edit summary and Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. memphisto 11:09, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

=

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Yummy Yummy (video) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"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.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:22, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your "I am a Dancer" statement. The 1994 version with Vanessa, Dorothy, and Greg is clearly different from the 1998 version which has the Wiggles in the background dancing across the screen. -AngusWOOF (talk) 00:27, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please also provide the source that confirms they put Vini Vini back on Wiggle time TV. It should not be added just because it's on your personal wishlist. It is also difficult to prove as it is behind the subscription firewall. -AngusWOOF (talk) 00:27, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Topic ban

Per the discussion at WP:AN/I#Destructive editing (Diff) you are topic-banned from editing pages on The Wiggles, widely construed. This includes the series' actors, for example. You are welcome to edit articles on other topics, but you should familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's guidelines and policies on verifiability and reliable sources, particularly for biographies of living persons. You can appeal this topic ban when you can show that you have understood the problems and will make sure that they do not recur. Huon (talk) 17:51, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

St. Patrick's Day

Happy St. Patrick's Day, folks. My grandma comes from County Mayo. - Dcelano, March 17, 2014, (UTC)

Unblocked

I wish I could be unblocked. Dcelano, 19:35, April 11, 2014, (UTC)

Daniel, you could be, but you've continually and persistently behaved in disruptive ways. How you've done that is well-documented, so I won't go into it again here, but you've attempted, over and over again, to circumvent your block by engaging in the same behavior through sockpuppets. If you demonstrate that you're able to follow policies and stop this kind of behavior, then perhaps you can be unblocked. Based on your past behavior, though, I'm not holding my breath. If you're truly interested, then read this to find out how to get unblocked: Wikipedia:Appealing a block. Then go read about this person, and follow her example: User:Wadewitz. Good luck. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:49, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea, Christine! I'll appeal my block. Dcelano, 20:52, April 11, 2014, (UTC)

Even if you were to be unblocked, you are still topic banned. That includes your WP:BEAN-ing behavior of saying "I won't post about The Wiggles" followed by a link about the Wiggles. -AngusWOOF (talk) 18:43, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That works too! User_talk:Dcelano, 20:28, April 12, 2014, (UTC)

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).

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

Request reason:

Hi, folks. I understand that I was banned from posting anything about the Wiggles because I didn't provide sources. I'm sorry about that and I won't do that anymore. And I understand that it was wrong. Please consider unbanning me.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline per below. — Daniel Case (talk) 23:17, 20 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.

You are currently both blocked and topic-banned. Although of course your block prevents you from editing on the Wiggles or anything else, so the point is presently moot, it is not clear to me whether you are appealing for an unblock or an un-ban. An unblock is theoretically possible, but I feel the topic-ban will probably be permanent. Note that this means that should you be unblocked you are still forbidden, on pain of re-block, from posting anything about the Wiggles, whether referenced or not. What exactly are you asking for?--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 10:48, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to know if I should remember to add sources such as websites as a reminder. Dcelano, 01:21 May 20, 2014 (UTC)

There are two issues here, Daniel:

You have been topic-banned from Wiggles-related articles. That means that you are not allowed to edit articles (or talk pages) of any articles related to the Wiggles. This topic ban was imposed because you repeatedly added material that was not accompanies by a reliable source. For the topic ban to be lifted, you're going to need to demonstrate that you understand our reliable sources policy.
Because you violated that topic ban and then edited from anonymous IP addresses to get around that topic ban, your account is blocked, and any other IP addresses you edit from will be blocked

For you to be unblocked, you're going to need to demonstrate that you are capable of editing Wikipedia without editing any Wiggles related articles for awhile, to show that you are willing to abide by your topic ban. As for showing that you understand reliable sources, you could start by posting an example of some new material you think should be added to a page that includes a link to a reliable source. I'm sure there are TV shows you are interested in besides the Wiggles; choose one of those for now. We understand that your intentions are good, but these restrictions have been put on you because you repeatedly failed to follow our policies. Wikipedia policies are much stricter than many other wikis on the web. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:33, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How about Thomas the Tank Engine & Friends? I might like to add something about when Gordon Goes Foreign was supposed to be taped as an adapted episode. I'll show you an example.https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Thomas_%26_Friends_(series_3) And I'll show you the source. http://www.sodor-island.net/episodeguide/rgg.html Dcelano, May 21, 2014 23:32, (UTC)

At first glance, and following a strict interpretation of WP:RS, the episode guide from sodor-island.net wouldn't work because it's not the most reliable source, and it's user-generated. However, with a topic like Thomas, and because it's probably not the kind of article that would get to even GAC, it would probably be okay. You see, this is the kind of topic in which you'd have to use this kind of source in order to fulfill broadness, which is a criteria for GAs. My concern is that you haven't demonstrated a basic understanding of what's a reliable source and what's not. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 00:39, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's why none of these pages I'm not supposed to edit are related to anyone or anything. Dcelano, 23:06, May 22, 2014 (UTC)

Problem

I have a problem. It's Angus_WOOF, Figureskatingfan and Ohnoitsjamie. They ban me because of a block invasisions as of March 2 2014. You see, I try to edit by creating different accounts. One more thing, I'm sorry not behaving very well. Dcelano, 18:53, July 20, 2014 (UTC)

It's been made very clear that you are topic banned (see above).
You were blocked for repeatedly violating that topic ban.
You continue to evade the block and break the topic ban. (Creating another account when your main account is blocked is called block evasion)
Wikipedia policy is that users who evade blocks and/or violate topic bans are immediately blocked.
The only way your block/topic ban will end would be for you to demonstrate to the community that you are able to go a period of time (six months, say) without evading your topic ban/block. If you manage to do that, come back in December and create a new unblock request, and we'll take it from there. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:08, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Jamie. How do I create a new unblock request? And can I please try come back in one month instead? Dcelano, 22:26, July 22, 2014 (UTC)

Goodbye

Goodbye, folks of Wikipedia. I'll miss you. I'll miss you too, ANGUSWOOF, Figureskatingfan and Ohnoitsjamie. Dcelano, August 1, 2014, 18:58, (UTC)

My Unblock Request

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).

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

Request reason:

Hi, folks. I understand that I was banned from posting anything about the Wiggles because I didn't provide sources. I'm sorry about that and I won't do that anymore. And I understand that it was wrong. Please consider unbanning me.

Decline reason:

I want to know how to edit a page on Wikipedia. Otherwise, I'll be back in December. — talk (talk) 19:15, September 6, 2014, UTC)

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.

How to Stop

Folks, I have a question. How do I stop repeating violations of topic ban evasions and how can I be unblocked so I can go back editing articles? Dcelano Dcelano (talk) 21:28, 6 September 2014 (UTC), :20, September 6, 2014, (UTC)[reply]

Reliable Source

I have a question. What's a reliable source? Dcelano October 10, 2014, 21:10, (UTC)

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).

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

Request reason:

Hi, folks. Can you please unblock me? I've been blocked for 8 months since the repeat violations of a topic ban.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline per below. — Daniel Case (talk) 16:00, 20 October 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.

Let's Wiggle

Dcelano (talk) 23:46, 23 October 2014 (UTC)That reminds me. Since the Wiggles aired their first TV show in 1998, what if they actually aired their first TV segments on the Disney Channel of Australia in 1997 called "Let's Wiggle"? I'll show you source examples.[reply]

http://www.powerhousemuseum.com/wiggles/wigglesquiz/quiz.xml - Which Australian pay TV channel screened The Wiggles first regular TV segments on a daily program called Let’s Wiggle in 1997? It was the Disney Channel, which was part of Optus Vision, one of Australia’s newly formed Pay TV services. Let’s Wiggle was made up of short segments from Wiggles videos.

http://web.archive.org/web/20131021172910/http://www.cassetterecorders.com.au/cassette-recorders-articles/1997/8/9/world-wakes-up-to-the-wiggles/ - Their daily segments on the Australian pay TV channel Disney, carried by Optus - they started at two a day in June but rose to four by public demand in mid-July - are being eyed by Disney in the US. It could be that Disney will wait for the overseas release of the movie to bolster awareness before picking up the TV spots. It could be that they decide to start the awareness campaign themselves.

"I don't know what the chances are," said Susan Metcalf, director of marketing at Disney TV Australia. "But we have certainly created the opportunities for the Wiggles to go international."

Then there is the group's own TV show that they are producing themselves to keep control over their burgeoning business.

Competition to buy the program among all the free-to-air and pay TV stations has been fierce. That is also, potentially, a huge money spinner internationally.

Dcelano,Dcelano (talk) 23:46, 23 October 2014 (UTC) 23:37, October 23, 2014, (UTC)[reply]

In reply to your email

You are blocked for again and again violating your topic ban (which, by the way, should not be removed from the talk page). The fact that you're still discussing the Wiggles immediately above doesn't suggest anything has changed, or that you would be willing to respect the ban if you were unblocked. Huon (talk) 01:25, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That means I'm blocked forever. Isn't there something I can do? Dcelano (talk 03:11, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you were unblocked, what would you edit? Huon (talk) 22:25, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would edit any articles besides The Wiggles. And another thing, a reliable source is an article we find on the internet. I'll show you examples on here.

(talk) 01:00, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're socking as User: Chatbox94; you've gone from editing The Wiggles to editing The Beatles, which you sometimes did with this account - and as usual, your edits had to be reverted. Radiopathy •talk• 01:06, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was wavering on what to do here. I wasn't overly impressed by your comment about reliable sources; "on the internet" is not part of the definition, for example. Now I see that instead of requesting this account to be unblocked you created a sockpuppet and proceeded to add content that wasn't supported by the source you gave. Even the most reliable source is no use if it doesn't say what you cite it for. Of course, block evasion doesn't help your cause either. Huon (talk) 21:05, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't there something I can do so I can edit on Wikipedia again? Dcelano, 23:18 December 13, 2014 (UTC)

Daniel, I suspect that you have been editing on Wikipedia, despite your blocks and repeated efforts to circumvent them through various sockpuppets and anonymous IPs. Go bother the folks over at TV.com, unless your behavior has resulted in that community banning you there as well. At that point, I highly doubt it that you'll ever be able to edit here, at least not in the way you want. It doesn't have to be that way, but you've demonstrated, over and over again, that you're committed to your agenda and refuse to comply with our community's standards here. We have a high calling to excellence in creating a free encyclopedia, just like The Wiggles are committed to excellence in their work with young children and their families, but you've consistently gone against it. If you stopped this behavior and demonstrated a willingness to learn and grow as an editor, perhaps you'd be able to edit Wikipedia. I personally don't see that ever happening. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:30, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Christine. How do I do that? User:_talk:Dcelano, 22:37, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, please don't bother the folks at TV.com either. Even though that site allows for more detailed stuff like quotes and trivia, it too needs to be supported with reliable sources and have some sort of notability. Posting stuff like "this scene is half a second longer in the rebroadcast" or posting "this is the first time since the previous video that Anthony does this" or that "Jeff appears in new Wiggles videos" information is just as disruptive. -AngusWOOF (talk) 00:26, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, AW; you're right, suggesting that Daniel be disruptive elsewhere was definitely not cool. Daniel, you've already been told what to do. Don't try and circumvent your blocks by using anonymous IPs to edit anywhere on Wikipedia. Don't create additional accounts, which is called sockpuppeting here. Just go away for an extended period of time--I'd suggest a year--and then if you still want to edit, provide evidence that you stayed away. For some reason, you haven't been able to do that so far, even though I and other editors have advised you in this way several times before. I think that if you stopped your disruptive behavior elsewhere, like on TV.com, and you could demonstrate that to the admins here, would also go far in convincing them that you're serious. I doubt that you can, so my suggestion is that you find something else to do with your time and give up on the idea of being a Wikipedian. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 07:11, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, guys. Dcelano (talk, 14:18, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Wiggles Live at Disneyland

It sure would be nice if somebody could create an article called "The Wiggles Live at Disneyland" by using a source like this one.

http://web.archive.org/web/19990222114603/http://www.thewiggles.com.au/new.html

Dcelano, November 25, 2014, 23:32, (UTC)

Why? This has no independent notability beyond a single mention at the videography section, and you wouldn't be able to edit it anyway. -AngusWOOF (talk) 00:24, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What if you or Figureskatingfan can? You see, the special aired on Disney Channel before the TV series was because of the launch of the Wiggles as mentioned on here.

https://www.facebook.com/thewiggles/photos/a.10150778147287018.466909.274289477017/10150778148117018/?type=3&src=https%3A%2F%2Fscontent-b-lga.xx.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-xfa1%2Fv%2Ft1.0-9%2F305983_10150778148117018_331495201_n.jpg%3Foh%3Df18d4ecd0073cc234838c0656bf6db80%26oe%3D553D500E&size=960%2C678&fbid=10150778148117018 - When we were first launched on the Disney channel here in Australia we had a photo with Mickey, this was NOT the official shot, but one on my camera. https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/The_Wiggles_Pty_Ltd#Television_and_DVD_production

And another thing, the Wiggles debuted two new gimmicks on Disney Channel Australia. One is where Captain Feathersword says "Well, blow me down" and the other is where has magical musical pirate buttons on his pirate coat.

User:Dcelano, 04:48, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My original reply still stands. Sorry I didn't mean to prompt you to stay here and debate this again. -AngusWOOF (talk) 09:28, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apology accepted, Angus. One more thing before I leave Wikipedia, everybody. Merry Christmas. Dcelano 01:00, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request

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).

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

Request reason:

Hi, folks. I understand that I was banned from posting anything about the Wiggles because I didn't provide reliable sourcessources. I'm sorry about that and I won't do that anymore. And I understand that it was wrong. Please consider unbanning me.

Decline reason:

I want to know how to edit a page on Wikipedia. — talk (talk)

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.

23:21, December 13, 2014, Dcelano (UTC)

Goodbye, Wikipedia

Everyone, I decided to retire from Wikipedia. You see, over the past year, these annoying admins such as AngusWOOF, Figureskatingfan, Huon and Ohnoitsjamie blocked me because of the repeat violations of a topic ban and sockpuppets like this.

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Dcelano/Archive

That's why I didn't want to edit pages on Wikipedia anymore and ANGUSWOOF and Figureskating told me to stop editing pages about The Wiggles, not even adding a Disneyland Special broadcast on Disney Channel Australia in 1998. One more thing before I go. Goodbye, Wikipedia. Dcelano, 00:00, December 18, 2014, (UTC)

Please stop breaking your topic ban with this WP:BEAN-ing Wiggles Disneyland Special topic. -AngusWOOF (talk) 00:10, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea, Angus. Farewell, Wikipedia. Dcelano (talk 20:36, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Farewell, Wikipedia

I'm sorry, everyone. I didn't listen to any of you, Angus_Mac and Figureskatingfan on how to demonstrate unblocking. Over the past year, I tried various ways to edit on Wikipedia but they caused to me to become sock puppet accounts as topic bans. Mom always says that the articles must have references to be seen. One more thing, everyone. Farewell, Wikipedia. User_talk:Dcelano 14:36, January 04, 2015, (UTC)

Daniel, you should always listen to your Mom! ;) As a Mom myself, I want to tell you that Wikipedia has very strict policies about reliable sources and that we all need to follow them the best we can. I also want to tell you that your attempts to bypass the policies by creating the sock puppet accounts isn't very honest and not something that I approve of. I think that you could spend your time in better ways. I hope you're being sincere right now, and if so, I wish you the best in whatever you choose to do. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:41, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's right, Christine. I must listen whatever I'm doing even when I avoid topic bans. I must leave Wikipedia just for now. User_talk:Dcelano 00:30, January 05, 2015, (UTC)

The Wiggles vs. Topic Ban

Talking about The Wiggles is one thing but causing the speech such as creating the page of a Disneyland special broadcast on the Disney Channel Australia in 1998 to become a topic ban, that's quite another. Dcelano, 02:42, February 4, 2015 (UTC))

Petitions

Who wants to sign these petitions of The Wiggles 1998 rarities? They are a Disneyland special broadcast on the Disney Channel Australia and the uncut 1998 version of TV Series 1 broadcast on Channel 7?

[Spam links removed. Huon (talk) 22:17, 6 February 2015 (UTC)][reply]

Dcelano, 19:04, February 6, 2015, (UTC)

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If you have already appealed to the Unblock Ticket Request System and been declined you may appeal to the Arbitration Committee's Ban Appeals Subcommittee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

Huon (talk) 22:17, 6 February 2015 (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/Dcelano, 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.

McGeddon (talk) 21:58, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 2015

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to User_talk:AngusWOOF#The_Wiggles_Live_at_Disneyland while logged out. Making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of more than one account or IP address by one person. If this was not your intention, then please always remember to log in when editing. Either that or someone's trying to impersonate you... GoddersUK (talk) 14:56, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In reply to your email: As far as I'm concerned there is no problem with what you actually said on AngusWOOF's talkpage, however you said it from an IP address. While you didn't attempt to hide your identity, so I'm assuming good faith, this is generally frowned upon and could be considered sockpuppetting. In particular, having reviewed the other content on your talk page I now suspect you were attempting to circumvent a block? GoddersUK (talk) 03:44, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit to add: When I say "as far as I'm concerned" I'm assuming for an editor in good standing. I notice that you were topic banned to avoid editing such pages, so it would probably be best not to talk about them either and just have focused on entirely different subjects... GoddersUK (talk) 03:47, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to your email

Your accounts/IPs are not being blocked because of a topic ban. You are blocked indefinitely because you could not abide by your topic ban. The accounts/IPs you use are being blocked because you are using them for block evasion. You cannot edit any Wikipedia pages, under any account or IP, while your indefinite block remains in place. Every time you evade your block your chances of ever being able to return to the community diminishes.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:21, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Missing Coach

The article The Missing Coach has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Most individual episodes of TV shows are not notable. Unsourced material about an unaired episode is not a likely exception.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SummerPhD^v2.0 03:18, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Wiggles.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:The Wiggles.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:03, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #16358 was submitted on Aug 18, 2016 02:58:36. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 02:58, 18 August 2016 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #16366 was submitted on Aug 18, 2016 20:41:57. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 20:41, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:TheWigglesMovieDVD.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TheWigglesMovieDVD.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:22, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What are you doing

Daniel, why are you trying to push things again? You've gone back to old behavior of using IPs to edit/disrupt Wiggles articles. Please stop, it does you very little good. And please do not email me again. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:28, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]