User talk:Jaydoggmarco

Disambiguation link notification for October 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Vice (2015 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Don Harvey.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- Fixed it, It now links to the correct actor.Jaydoggmarco (talk) 06:29, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted Vandalism on Patrick Muldoon article

Hello, I recently reverted some blatant vandalism on the Patrick Muldoon article which you corrected the first time. I don't know how or where to report it, but it looks like it was the same person who did it twice. Let me know if you know what to do about this.

Report them to the admins.Jaydoggmarco (talk) 01:55, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.. Jaydoggmarco this relates to your 4 reverts in the space of a few hours at Kiki Camarena. -Darouet (talk) 02:39, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 2021

Before adding a category to an article, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. The category being added must already exist, and must be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 09:24, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I want to echo what Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d has said. This is currently a problem at Matt Gaetz where at least three editors have objected to the tag you recently restored. Springee (talk) 02:50, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Ricky Shroder 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for 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. Lard Almighty (talk) 07:23, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Democracy Now! ‎ . 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. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 09:24, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Félix Rodríguez

Trust me when I tell you that I think these allegations are garbage.....but they appear in RS (and a lot of people are talking about them). Ergo, we are stuck with it. I wrote that section and I think it's pretty NPOV.Rja13ww33 (talk) 00:22, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Jaydoggmarco reported by User:Dr.Swag Lord, Ph.d (Result: ). Thank you. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 23:15, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July 2021

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Ricky Schroder. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}. -- Scott Burley (talk) 01:24, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. TJD2 (talk) 04:00, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 2021

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring, as you did at Jimmy Dore. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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) 11:19, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Jimmy Dore. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. After lengthy deliberation on the talk page, there was no consensus in favor of describing Jimmy Dore as an American conspiracy theorist. This resulted in the category being removed. Without any edit summary, you re-added it days later, demonstrating a lack of interest in collaborating with other editors. You have recently been blocked for edits made to the same article. Please do not continue. Vanilla Wizard 💙 03:22, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Toddst1 (talk) 05:20, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2022

Hello, I'm Bovineboy2008. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Afterward (film), 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. BOVINEBOY2008 01:06, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits here [1]appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. Any positive contributions aside, repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. _signed,Willondon (talk) 02:12, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Danny Masterson

Please don't ignore prominent comments regarding to the lede. We don't add "convicted felon" to the first sentence of everyone convicted of a crime per WP:LEDE. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:10, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, just a reminder that BLPs are a WP:Contentious topic. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:48, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 2023

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 Danny Masterson, you may be blocked from editing. Stop doing this. You know very well this is under discussion on the talk page because you have participated in the discussion. Meters (talk) 03:37, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And user:OhNoitsJamie has already pointed out that you are ignoring the edit comment in the lead saying not to add such terms as "convicted felon". Meters (talk) 03:40, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a scientologist? Why are you trying to cover for a felon and rapist. Jaydoggmarco (talk) 03:39, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at User talk:Jaydoggmarco. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Meters (talk) 03:41, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And on Talk:Danny_Masterson. Meters (talk) 03:44, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Shadow of Doubt (album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bass.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Eugene Puryear. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. St Anselm (talk) 01:44, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:21, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for repeatedly restoring contentious material despite a talk page discussion and despite being reverted by an admin as an admin action on the page Zoe McLellan, you have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 2 weeks. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:52, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

Block Appeal

unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard or administrators' noticeboard. I didn't violate an arbitration decision on Zoe McLellan because the noticeboard discussion on whether or not to include the info of her child abduction case has not made a decision or reached a consensus to include or not include the information.).Jaydoggmarco (talk) 11:27, 2 November 2023 (UTC)}} Jaydoggmarco (talk) 11:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You need to remove the nowiki-tags if you want this to look right. In general, when editors have doubts on BLP-stuff, that stuff stays out of the article until discussion is done. And per this talkpage, you know about edit-warring. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:25, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The arbitration case is a general one about WP:BLPs, which are a contentious topic. If I may offer some friendly advice, I would suggest striking the noblock request and thinking about it for at least 24 hours before putting a new one. An unblock request should show awareness of why you were blocked, and make it appear likely that it won't happen again. It is easier to do that with a cooler head. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 11:29, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well i have no plans to make further edits on the article. Jaydoggmarco (talk) 11:32, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've copied your appeal to AE, but Russ's advice above is good and you should listen to it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:32, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of the decision i think my time on this site is done. I will probably retire my account if i'm unblocked. Jaydoggmarco (talk) 11:33, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you keep making statements like "people on here don't care that a woman is on the run with after kidnapping her child" your account is likely to be forcibly retired. I would strongly suggest you take this time to go and read up on Wikipedia policies, starting with WP:BLP. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:36, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Talk:Gino Jennings, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Lard Almighty (talk) 08:23, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion opened at WP:BLPN

Hi Jaydogg, I'm not going to war over it. I've asked for help from the BLP noticeboard.[2] All the best, Thomas B (talk) 06:34, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]