User talk:UpMentalSyndrome

Your username

Hello. I'm an administrator here. I think some users here might feel your username is somewhat insulting or insensitive, so please consider changing it. You can do that simply be never using this account again, and creating a completely new account. or you can request a name change which will keep your past edits associated with your new username. See Wikipedia:Changing username for how to request this. With only 5 edits under your belt, it's probably easier all round if you simply abandon this account (maybe explaining why before you go) and then starting a new one. Many thanks. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:22, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry about that. I assume you must think my username is making fun of people with Down Syndrome. I never intended for that, but I'd rather not get blocked for something as minor or petty as that, because it will make me feel worse than the people I might have offended with my username. Can you give me steps on how to change my username?DownBrainSyndrome (talk) 20:10, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

October 2021

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 Bill Cosby, you may be blocked from editing. Drmies (talk) 00:18, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

October 2021

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:28, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Thomas & Friends: All Engines Go. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
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 and 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. As you were already told, an unverified social media account is not reliable to use. Continuing to revert/edit war with the same source used is not helpful. Magitroopa (talk) 18:52, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is it really that bad to edit war even if I believe I am right? Where are the rules that say that?UpMentalSyndrome (talk) 19:05, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's literally in the first paragraph of the policy linked to in the message above.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:12, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Hello, I'm Magical Golden Whip. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Thomas & Friends: All Engines Go, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Magical Golden Whip (talk) 03:31, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why was Odie's own page removed?

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Odie for the discussion that has led to that. Daranios (talk) 16:22, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Grace VanderWaal

Sorry to get heavy but I am one of several admins who will take strong action regarding mentions such as in this diff. It's hard to provide a satisfying explanation because people are used to being anonymous and free to say whatever with no consequences. All I can say is that blocks will happen. Your basic point is very valid and thank you for making it. However, it will have to be without that name. Johnuniq (talk) 02:38, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]