User talk:Jatremitiedi

January 2015

Please do not add or change content, as you did to The Big Bang Theory (season 8), without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. replaced info from a good reference with info from a dubious one - no reason for this. Also sock puppet of blocked user Jt029350 (talk · contribs) Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:25, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a sock puppet. Jatremitiedi (talk) 22:52, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What are examples of reliable sources? Jatremitiedi (talk) 00:51, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at List of Liv and Maddie episodes. 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 your being blocked from editing. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:08, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Pcfan500. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Mulaney because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. pcfan500 (talk) 02:32, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mulaney

I reverted your edit as you said that it was cancelled. Sorry. I blindly reverted your edit. I am now looking at the source and it is just a prediction. Feel free to remake the edit, saying that it's a prediction, as it doesn't really seem to be confirmed. Thanks! Once again, sorry. I'm new to STiki. I went too fast. pcfan500 (talk) 13:48, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest not putting pundit speculation, no matter what the source, in the article. Wait for something solid. Geraldo Perez (talk) 13:53, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting Edits

How do you revert edits? Jatremitiedi (talk) 17:00, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Personal opinion

Sources not Updated

Due to a Neilsen glitch, the sources that you use to cite ratings in TV articles (TV by the Numbers), is not updated with current ratings. My edit to The Big Bang Theory is updated, where yours is not. Jatremitiedi (talk) 22:20, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2015

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at The Big Bang Theory. 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 your being blocked from editing. AussieLegend (✉) 14:19, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jatremitiedi, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Jatremitiedi! 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 peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Missvain (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:07, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2015

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Girl Meets World. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. as before Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:50, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I did include a reliable source that I have been using for years with other sites that I have contributed to. Jatremitiedi (talk) 22:53, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is a bit more strict on what we will accept as a reliable source. See WP:Identifying reliable sources and if you want opinions from others raise the issue at reliable sources noticeboard. Generally a site must have a well-established reputation for fact checking, unlike the ones you are attempting to use here. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:20, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple accounts and editing

So far you have used Jt029350, JosephT., JosephTremitiedi and Jatremitiedi for editing wiki. If you wish to continue to edit please don't just create another account but go to User talk:Jt029350 the first account you used and follow the instructions for appealing a block as listed on the block message that is the last item on the page, particularly Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks. You will probably need to be pretty persuasive in explaining why you won't make disruptive edits any more and make a case for why you will be a good productive editor on Wiki. I believe that a lot of the edits you made in this account were valuable and that you are able to be a good contributor to wiki. Using multiple accounts to avoid a block, though, is pretty serious and not appreciated. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:03, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]