User talk:JordanBaumann1211

Welcome!

Hello, JordanBaumann1211, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Television content rating systems. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Betty Logan (talk) 03:10, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It may come as a surprise to you, but Wikipedia has no channels. It is, after all, an encyclopedia, not a video website like YouTube. Kleuske (talk) 21:09, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Discussion

There is a Request for Comments on the new blue section in the comparison table of Television content rating systems that you may wish to participate in. Please do not make any further alterations to the color scheme in use on the article without first discussing the matter on the talk page. Thank you for your cooperation. SlitherioFan2016 (talk) 10:07, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

November 2016

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Video game rating system, did not appear constructive and has been undone. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. SlitherioFan2016 (talk) 07:20, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:→§§ This Is A Streetway §§←

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Template:→§§ This Is A Streetway §§←, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. — JJMC89 (T·C) 20:15, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I Don't Want Any Of My Templates To Be Deleted! Thank You! :) JordanBaumann1211 (talk) 22:51, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They are not your templates. Please read WP:OWN.--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 23:17, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Television content rating systems

Jordan, you have once again installed the blue shading at Television content rating systems. As I explain at Talk:Television_content_rating_systems#Changes_to_the_color_scheme the existing color scehem is subject to a consensus. If you wish to propose alterations by all means do so, but please do not WP:EDIT WAR against an RFC consensus. Betty Logan (talk) 22:52, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How Do I Seem To Be Making The New Blue Section? I Don't Guess What It's Not Actually A Race! JordanBaumann1211 (talk) 22:52, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

I've just reverted three sets of edits that you made to Video game content rating system, Motion picture content rating system, and Television content rating systems because it wasn't clear why you'd changed the language that was there, and because the phrasing you substituted didn't make sense - and the word "Watch" was inexplicably capitalized. Perhaps there are better phrasings available for those captions but I suggest you raise the issue on the article Talk pages first to gain a sense of what other people think, as well as to get some assistance in ensuring that the new language is grammatical. Let me know if you have any questions - thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 00:21, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah! I Know! >:D JordanBaumann1211 (talk) 22:53, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Banned On Kongregate

Oh No! I'm Banned On Kongregate! How Is That Possible! D: JordanBaumann1211 (talk) 21:36, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Still Banned On Kongregate

Okay, I'll Stop Uploading Stolen Games On Kongregate! JordanBaumann1211 (talk) 21:36, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple accounts / creating user pages

You should edit from only one account. Please see Wikipedia:Username_policy#Using_multiple_accounts. And you should not create user pages for users who don't exist. I've asked that they be deleted - please don't recreate them. Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 00:58, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is this account - User:Jordan Baumann - you as well, or rather just someone else named "Jordan Baumann" who created an account in May 2016 and hasn't edited? I'm concerned about your pattern of editing - Wikipedia isn't a social networking site but that seems to be the way you're treating it. See this link for more information. Let me know. Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 14:23, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. JohnInDC (talk) 17:28, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 22:32, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I Have Been Blocked By User:Bbb23, And I Don't Wanna Be Blocked! :(

This Isn't Even Very Good! :(

I Need To Have A Good Reason! :(

I Want To Be Here To Build An Encyclopedia... :(

I Don't Really Wanna Let Anyone To Block Me! >:(

Hello! Hello, admins! Please unblock me! I did not receive any warning, notification or opportunity to discuss JJMC89's concern prior to my banning and I am not a vandal. JJMC89 does not allow users to e-mail him and I cannot post on JJMC89's user talk page or any admin page to discuss this! JordanBaumann1211 (talk) 21:52, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Still Blocked

I haven't heard anything about why I was banned, how long I will be banned or whether there has been any review progress. JordanBaumann1211 (talk) 23:08, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@JordanBaumann1211: I will tell you why you were blocked. You were blocked (not banned) because you have only been editing your userspace and userboxes, and not making helpful contributions to the encyclopedia itself. I hope this helps explain things. Red Panda 25 23:26, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm So Sorry RedPanda25! :( I'm Going To Make Some Helpful Contributions! :) JordanBaumann1211 (talk) 23:37, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Unblocked

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).

JordanBaumann1211 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm So Sorry! :( JordanBaumann1211 (talk) 23:11, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Please explain here what you believe you did wrong, and tell us what you want to write about if unblocked. One piece of advice; you clearly want to edit your way, but we require that you edit our way. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 23:24, 3 December 2016 (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.

As best I can tell, every edit you have ever made to Wikipedia has either been to your own userspace, vandalism, a copyright violation, or some combination of the three. I initially argued for just removing the spam links from your userpage and allowing you to try to demonstrate that you have something useful to add, but seeing the scale of the disruption you're causing I now entirely concur with this block. I won't decline any future unblock request myself, as given the time I've just wasted cleaning up the parts of the mess you've caused that were actually illegal rather than just annoying I'm not an unbiased observer, but I'd strongly urge any admin considering unblocking to get explicit confirmation from you that you actually have something useful to add to Wikipedia and are willing to follow our rules, and that you're going to quit violating copyrights and goofing around in userspace, on the understanding that anything further will lead to an permanent block. ‑ Iridescent 23:29, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm So Sorry Anthony Bradbury! :( JordanBaumann1211 (talk) 23:35, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@JordanBaumann1211: Stop apologizing and start telling us what you can contribute to Wikipedia. Red Panda 25 23:38, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The key part of my comment above is you actually have something useful to add to Wikipedia and are willing to follow our rules. Unless you can explain what you want to do here and why it fits in with Wikipedia's purpose, and give an undertaking to quit posting copyright violations (non-negotiable) and stop goofing around in userspace (strongly recommended), you'll remain blocked. ‑ Iridescent 23:54, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Iridescent Please Don't Delete My Uploads, Thank You!

Explain to me what educational purpose they serve and I'll reconsider. ‑ Iridescent 00:18, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure that it has been established – or at least strongly presumed – previously in a (then) high profile Wikipedia drama that children are not (legally) capable of releasing uploads under license anyway. Keri (talk) 02:17, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Because of your vandalism to this page, I've revoked your access to it. You can use WP:UTRS to appeal.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:51, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Hello, admins! Please unblock me! I did not receive any warning, notification or opportunity to discuss JJMC89's concern prior to my banning and I am not a vandal. JJMC89 does not allow users to e-mail him and I cannot post on JJMC89's user talk page or any admin page to discuss this! JordanBaumann1211 (talk) 21:52, 5 December 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:3797:50D0:C1AF:A724:397E:FA39 (talk) [reply]

As you've already been told, the way to appeal a block is by following the instructions at WP:UTRS, not by hassling admins via email. ‑ Iridescent 14:11, 22 December 2016 (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/JordanBaumann1211, 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.

--Mali1702 ^Talk _Contribs 07:05, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]