User talk:Sundropie

Welcome!

Hello, Sundropie, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! Urban Versis 32 (talk) 23:11, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started

Finding your way around

Editing articles

Getting help

Frequently asked questions
Cheatsheet
Our help forum for new editors, the Teahouse
The Help Desk, for more advanced questions
Help pages
Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles

How you can help

Community Portal
Join a WikiProject
Follow Wikipedia etiquette
Practice civility
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Urban Versis 32 (talk) 23:11, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bi-Beast, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Keith Ferguson. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tiger Shark (Marvel Comics)

Welcome to Wikipedia. You removed content from Wikipedia with this edit of yours to Tiger Shark (Marvel Comics), but without providing a rationale for this in an edit summary. When removing material, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page.

Also, you replaced the information in question with information that was not accompanied by a citation of a reliable source. Wikipedia requires that the material in its articles be accompanied by reliable, verifiable (usually secondary) sources explicitly cited in the article text in the form of an inline citation, which you can learn to make here. If you ever have any other questions about editing, or need help regarding the site's policies, just let me know by leaving a message for me in a new section at the bottom of my talk page. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 01:02, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Using sources for voice actors

Hello there, I believe you are relatively new here and acting in good faith. However, I want to caution you that any time you add new information to an article, Wikipedia expects you to use a reliable source that documents the information you add. This is particularly true in the case of adding the names of voice actors to an article, because we need to be careful when adding information about living people per our biographies of living people policy - which applies both to actual biographical articles, and also to any article that includes information about living people. If you look at the articles that you have been editing, you may see that most of the information in the "Other media" sections does include a citation, and whenever it does not include a citation that information can be removed until a citation is provided. Therefore, I will be removing voice actor and other media appearance mentions that you have added, but you are welcome to restore the information if you can include a citation to a reliable source. You can look at the articles to get an idea of what kind of sources other editors have used to source this information. Also, please note that if you do see these citations in the article already, please do not remove them. Thank you. BOZ (talk) 02:53, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As to that last point I mentioned above, I saw you removing sources here, here, here, here, and here. Please, especially, do NOT do that anymore. Thank you. BOZ (talk) 03:06, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022

Hello, I'm Osarius. I noticed that you recently removed content from Blizzard (comics) without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Osarius 14:44, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thunderbolt Ross

Hi. Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for working to improve the site with your edits to Thunderbolt Ross, as we really appreciate your participation. However, the edits had to be reverted, for the following two reasons:

First, you removed content from the Infobox, but without providing a rationale for this in an edit summary. When removing material, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. The fact that Red Hulk's powers include energy absorption, a healing factor, etc. is indeed supported by citations in the Powers and abilities section, and is therefore, valid for inclusion in the Infobox.

Second, you replaced the information with uncited content, specifically the claims that his powers include "transformation" and "leaping". As as been explained to you above by other editors, Wikipedia cannot accept uncited material. Wikipedia requires that the material in its articles be accompanied by reliable, verifiable (usually secondary) sources explicitly cited in the article text in the form of an inline citation, which you can learn to make here. Sources do not tend to describe his leaping ability as a "power", as it is merely an application of his superhuman strength.

If you ever have any other questions about editing, or need help regarding the site's policies, just let me know by leaving a message for me in a new section at the bottom of my talk page. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 01:36, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Jasmine (Aladdin). Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:28, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I understand. Yes, I am familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sundropie (talk) 18:24, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The issue with most of your edits is that is was adding too much in-universe details where the articles on Wikipedia are meant to be more from on out-of-universe perspective. These characters are not real, they are fictional characters. There are plenty of Fandom wikis that go in the detail you were adding, it is not really appropriate for Wikipedia. Also there are instructions at template:Infobox character/doc that describe what goes in the infobox. . WP:Writing about fiction has some more guidance. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:46, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022

Hello, I'm Sumanuil. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Chamber (character) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks.Sumanuil. _{(talk to me)} 21:52, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Characters

If you want to put some work into them, I recently restored Eternals characters Interloper (comics) and Kronos (comics), and I also built new articles for Black Panther characters White Wolf (comics), Nakia (comics), Tetu (comics), Zenzi (comics), and T'Channa. BOZ (talk) 15:50, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just also letting you know that I was able restore Hippolyta (Marvel Comics), create Nyx (Marvel Comics), and restore Hera (Marvel Comics) and Neptune (Marvel Comics). BOZ (talk) 15:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking at these. :) I also brought back Varnae and started Kindred (Marvel Comics), and there are a lot of others that I hope to be able to bring back or start in the future. BOZ (talk) 09:36, 4 February 2023 (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) 01:56, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain namespaces (File) for violating copyright policy by uploading images from another source without evidence of permission.

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 ~~~~}}. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:39, 31 January 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

Copyright violations

Decline reason:

We know why you have been blocked from the file namespace, you're not explaining why you should be unblocked. And I'm finding your last few edits strange and am beginning to wonder that rather than unblock you, you should be blocked from editing at all. Nthep (talk) 18:28, 3 February 2023 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Copyright violations

Decline reason:

Please read the entirety of Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks and a write new unblock request. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:41, 2 March 2023 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Copyright violationsSundropie (talk) 03:17, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Per below. — Daniel Case (talk) 07:16, 2 March 2023 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Copyright violations

Decline reason:

That doesn't provide any indication that you understand why you are blocked, or what will be different about your editing in the future if you are unblocked. JBW (talk) 21:58, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. SQL ^{Query Me!} 04:01, 12 March 2023 (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.

I have no idea why you think just saying "Copyright violations" is a reason why you should be unblocked. Have you taken the advice above to read the guide to appealing blocks? If you haven't, then I strongly advise you to do so. There is also no point whatever in repeating exactly the same unblock request which has already been declined, since it will have the same result. However, if you do post a further unblock request, whether the same as a previous one or not, please leave the declined request in place, so that any administrator who reviews your latest request can see any previous requests without having to search through editing history. JBW (talk) 21:35, 9 March 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

I understand completely why I had been blocked, I won't continue to cause damage or disruption, and I'll make useful contributions instead.

Decline reason:

And now you've just shown that you can cut and paste. You must convince the administrators of those things, not simply parrot them. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 17:32, 15 March 2023 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I will be careful about editing certain file namespaces from now on in the future, as well as uploading images correctly.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline; user is no longer blocked. Yamla (talk) 10:55, 16 April 2023 (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.

I have returned several declined unblock requests to this page. Declined requests may not be removed while the block is still active. I'll also note here for reviewing admins that this user is (in my opinion) actively disrupting Wikipedia by adding inappropriate links to wikis and fansites to dozens of articles, and also edit warring to retain those links. - MrOllie (talk) 17:28, 12 March 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

I understand completely why I had been blocked, I won't continue to cause damage or disruption, and I'll make useful contributions instead.

Decline reason:

And now you've just shown that you can cut and paste. You must convince the administrators of those things, not simply parrot them. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 17:32, 15 March 2023 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I will try to be careful about editing file namespaces in the future from now on and upload images the right way.

Decline reason:

After these vague and generic appeals, it seems you have a problem comprehending what anyone is saying to you. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, and you aren't collaborating here. You were asked to provide a convincing appeal, and so far you have failed to do so.

Specifically, to be unblocked, you must explain your understanding of why your block was necessary, and explain clearly and in detail how you intend to proceed if you are unblocked.

I am not convinced that this block is no longer necessary. I am not convinced that you understand why you have been blocked. I am not convinced that you won't continue to be disruptive. I am not convinced you will make useful contributions.

All those things, you need to address for the next reviewing administrator. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:26, 14 May 2023 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I will be careful to avoid editing strange, but disruptive file namespaces from now on in the future and edit them the right way, as well as less weird.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline, now that the user is now site blocked. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 01:48, 18 May 2023 (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.

About the Unblock Request

I'm very sorry about my last few edits being strange, I'm just new at this. Please forgive me and I'll try to make my edits less strange next time. Sundropie (talk) 20:37, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but for the time being forget about the unblock from the file namespace and concentrate on other edits to articles. Then come back to address the block - but you WILL have to explain that you understand why the block was imposed and how you will address those concerns. Nthep (talk) 20:45, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Characters - Abilities

Hello Sundropie, I noticed that you sometimes edited the abilities of Marvel Comics' characters. I just wanted to say a few words about it.

-Most pages tend to list the supernatural abilities first. The non-supernatural abilities (ex. hand-to-hand combatant) and the equipments (ex. weapon) of a character generally come after.

-You do not have to summarize the abilities of a character. You can display a lot of their skills in the infobox.

-A lot of pages list the abilities that require the highest word count first, purely for aesthetic reasons. This is not compulsory though.

Happy editing. Higher Further Faster (talk) 19:30, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023

Hello, I'm Ppt91. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Bat-Mite, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Ppt91 (talk) 00:57, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Qwv (talk) 10:48, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note about your file namespace block

Hi, Sundropie. When I blocked you sitewide for a month on March 12, that block broke your indefinite file namespace block. (This is unfortunately unavoidable for technical reasons.) I have now restored the file namespace block, since it was supposed to be indefinite. Yamla, I'm not sure whether it was the sitewide block or the partial block that the user tried to appeal (with no date, but not recently) above, that you declined today because they were no longer blocked. It's true — they weren't — but that was my fault, I should have been quicker about restoring the partial block. Anyway, now I have, so could you possibly take a fresh look at their request? I thought it's probably better to ask you, than to tell them to appeal again — these technicalities can reasonably be overwhelming for newish users. Bishonen | tålk 14:05, 16 April 2023 (UTC).[reply]

I'd still have declined. Their unblock request was pretty general and not at all convincing. --Yamla (talk) 16:45, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I thought so too. Bishonen | tålk 18:39, 16 April 2023 (UTC).[reply]

Removing unblock templates

You may not remove declined unblock requests while your block is still in effect, see Wikipedia:User_pages#Removal_of_comments,_notices,_and_warnings. You have done this multiple times - you must stop. Do not post (another) apology, either here on on my user talk page. You can confirm that you are sorry by simply stopping this. MrOllie (talk) 20:12, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Marvel character tags

Hi, please stop removing tags from Marvel character pages as it prevents the issues needed to make them viable Wikipedia articles being easily identified and tackled. It is not some sort of weird attack on those pages or characters, simply a way of notifying capable editors that material needs to be added to make them more suitable for Wikipedia. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 18:26, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Skaar (character)

Please do not remove information from articles, as you did with this edit to Skaar (character), unless you have a valid rationale for doing so, which you can provide in your edit summary. The character is indeed half human, so there is no basis for removing that fact. Thank you. Nightscream (talk) 14:39, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for WP:CIR - repeated submission of inappropriate unblock requests; does not use edit summaries despite several requests to do so; and unexplained reversions (example, example).

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 01:47, 18 May 2023 (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).

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

Request reason:

I will not continue to make disruptive edits in the future, like the repeated submission of inappropriate unblock requests, certain file namespaces being strange because they don't have the right media information for them, and unexplained reversions.

Decline reason:

Neither this request, nor the conversation below, substantially addresses the reasons for which you were blocked or demonstrates that you understand what you would need to improve going forward. As you have made a large number of failed requests, I will be revoking access to this talk page. Further appeals may be made to the Unblock Ticket Request System, but before doing so, I strongly advise you to read, and ensure you understand, both the guide to appealing blocks and everything you have been told on this page. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:00, 3 June 2023 (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.

Please note that this does not have to be an infinite block; however, you must convince an administrator in an unblock request that you will not continue to make disruptive edits. This includes explaining what you did wrong, and how your editing will change if unblocked. Repeated inappropriate unblock requests, like you did above, will result in the revocation of your talk page access. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 01:52, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What I would like to see from you is an explanation of the following:

Explain why you reverted the edits I mentioned above (Special:Diff/1155325685 and Special:Diff/1155339509).
- Explain why you shouldn't have reverted these edits.
- How will you revert edits differently in the future?
You often make small edits, then revert them immediately after. For example: edit, revert. Why do you do this? (as a side note: you can use the preview button or the visual editor to prevent mistakes like this).
I would also like a commitment to use edit summaries for every single edit.
Other editors have raised concerns about your editing on your talk page; in the last couple days, you've had three sections (#Skaar (character), #Marvel character tags, #Removing unblock templates) created, and you have not responded to any of them.
- Explain why it is important to communicate with other editors. (hint - see WP:ENGAGE)
- State how you will respond to other editors' concerns about your editing in the future.

You should include all of this in any unblock request, or it will likely be declined again. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 02:32, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also not sure what you mean by "certain file namespaces being strange" -- you were blocked from the file namespace for copyright violations. In your unblock request, you must convince (not just tell) the reviewing administrator that you understand why copyright violations are not tolerated on Wikipedia, and that you will not make them in the future. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 02:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1.Because I trying to make the sentence sound right. 2.I don't want to put more than the same word in those sentences. 3.I didn't know that the images needs file namespaces and media information before uploading. 4.I've already made things right with the Skaar and Absorbing Man pages before this happened. 5.I thought you guys don't need the Marvel character tags anymore. Sundropie (talk) 02:52, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ingenuity: seems to have this well in hand, so I'll just wave in passing. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:32, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #74530

is closed -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 13:24, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Mr.Hyde.webp

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Mr.Hyde.webp. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:35, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Gleek 2.webp

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Gleek 2.webp. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:20, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Titania.webp

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Titania.webp. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:37, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Continued block evasion

User has engaged in continued block evasion (and continued unblock request trolling) at 172.13.193.84. --Yamla (talk) 18:23, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]