User talk:Infrabel1

Welcome!

Hi Infrabel1! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Hide on Rosé (thảo luận) 14:44, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.

Have a wonderfull day Infrabel1 (talk) 14:46, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feb.2024

Hello! I noticed that you were triggering an alarming amount of edit filters, but it seems that you're just welcoming every account. I don't know, but maybe the filter isn't reliable at all. "Unusual talk page activity" When you're just using the intended template... Hell. AlphaBetaGammsh (talk) 14:09, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is weird. And yes, i just welcome new accounts and point them to the right direction so no idea why it triggers. Maybe it is because of the low time between greetings? Infrabel1 (talk) 14:13, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop with the welcomes. If this were a generally desired action, there would be a bot to do it. And users who have not even made any edits sometimes report feeling spooked when someone starts talking to them before they have even done anything. DMacks (talk) 06:31, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i will keep it to users that have made their first contribution then.

With special attention to users that got their first contribution reverted Infrabel1 (talk) 15:34, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm here for the same thing. It's best not to welcome problematic editors (see Opss2024, whose edits have been promotional in nature). I'd recommend generally familiarizing yourself with problematic edits, and from the Welcoming committee page:

"Our main activity is to welcome new users who have already made constructive edits... Always check their edits first" (emphasis not mine)

I'd recommend reading over that whole page, as looking at your contributions so far, it's been mostly welcomes. I hope this helps, happy editing! Schrödinger's jellyfish ✉ 07:04, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry. Will take more care to read the edits.

Usually i just looked if there was already something written on their talkpage concerning problematic edits. Infrabel1 (talk) 07:07, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, how i'm locked some article to protect the article from vandalism

Can you give me some tips KIRACHI000 (talk) 12:51, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some articles are locked by an administrator to combat vandalism.

This is done mostly when the page has been the subject of an edit war, or the subject of countless bad edits in a short period of time.

Depending on the article it can be locked so only autoconfirmed or extended autoconfirmed users can still do edits.

You are an autoconfirmed users if you have done 5 edits. Extended autoconfirmed when your account has done 500 edits and is at least 30 days old.

If you dont have the requirements, you can still ask someone to add your edits on the talk page of the article in question.

Hope this helps Infrabel1 (talk) 06:23, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war warning

Your recent editing history at Loserfruit shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Hello, you have been repeatedly trying to remove or alter the same content for no good reason. This is considered WP:DISRUPTIVE editing. Please stop this, or you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 11:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Bbb23 (talk) 22:51, 2 June 2024 (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).

Infrabel1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Account is not a sockpuppet. Nor are any edits in violation of wikipedia policy. Infrabel1 (talk) 20:29, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

CU data indicates a strong likelihood, combined with your blatantly inappropriate editing. Pretty straight-forward decline here. Yamla (talk) 20:38, 3 June 2024 (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.

What inappropriate editing if i may ask? Everything is written neutrally, backed by reliable sources/references or are just edits where i used the bot to update dead links. @yamla — Preceding unsigned comment added by Infrabel1 (talk • contribs)

Your edit warring and your WP:GAMING at User talk:Infrabel1/sandbox at the very least. Don't ping me again. --Yamla (talk) 12:47, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]