User talk:Mellemmellem

Date of birth

Hello. I'm leaving this message here - it applies both to you and the other editors at the David Dorfman article. I'm tired of seeing this article reappear on my watchlist with unsubstantiated changes to the date of birth. I have now removed the date, apart from the year which I guess is not contentious - if it is I will remove that as well. From here on in, WP:V will be strictly applied, meaning I insist on seeing a reliable extant reference for this date. Please do not restore it without such a reference. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:13, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. Listen, you cannot just continue reverting to restore your edits without addressing the reference problem. Do you have a source for this date or not? -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 17:29, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Continually reverting without discussion is probably the worst path for you to follow. So I'm guessing that you don't have any reference for this date? At this point both dates are indistinguishable from dates which have been made up, so they don't belong in the article. Please take another look at WP:V and tell me if it's something you subscribe to. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 06:37, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Thompson

According the Wikipedia combat sports project rules, a fighters record should only reflect professional matches unless a separate category is provided for amateur fights. Stephen Thompson's amateur record has been listed under his professional MMA record. The IKF links include a reference to his 37-0 kickboxing record, and some information regarding his professional record. There are several sources that reference his professional record as 20-0, and amateur as 37-0. The UFC link mentioned a "Combined record," and that is a reference to the two types of competition.

Please stop reverting my change unless you have a source for the number you are using. The sources you have cited substantiate the information I put regarding his combined 57-0 amateur/professional record. This is not trolling from me. I have been fan of Stephen Thompson since his UFC debut. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpiritMachine (talk • contribs) 03:45, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The information that I have provided has proven to be substantial evidence of the page of Stephen Thompson

3RR

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 BRD 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. - Soulwatcher ^Talk

Edit warring at Stephen Thompson (fighter)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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 ~~~~}}.

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.

The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 13:33, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Thompson

Do you not see the amateur kickboxing category displayed under his MMA record? Mentioning it is not even required per the martial arts project. So why do you insist on displaying them together? His professional record is not 57-0. His combined record with 37 amateur wins is up to 57-0. It's on his Facebook page, and a simple search of "Stephen Thompson's Kickboxing record" shows the combined record. The sources you cite don't follow your rhetoric. The UFC link shows his amateur record along with a list of his amateur titles. Followed by a combined record of 57-0. Why would his combined record even be mentioned as a concept if it didn't mean professional and amateur? Fighters do not say their record is combined unless it includes different rulesets, or competition type. You see this practice on Gennady Golovkin's page where there is a reference to his combined record, but his professional record is not displayed as over 300 fights.

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SpiritMachine. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. Once the block has expired, you're welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe that this block was in error, 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. GAB^gab 18:19, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2019

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Enzo Ferrari. Also sockpuppetry with 99.55.200.69 will be investigated YBSOne (talk) 17:04, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 14:21, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:16, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mellemmellem

Hello, I just want to take this time to explain that in was in my best interest as well as the interest for the wikipedia community to uphold the integrity and the historical accuracy of the pages edited. It was never my intention to disrespect nor discredit anything that you guy were trying to accomplish. I take full responsibility for my disruptive editing and I want to apologize for any misunderstandings, discrepancies, or disturbances I may have inflicted upon you.