User talk:Amongusgamer123

January 2024[edit]

Hello, I'm Ternera. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Na'aran—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Ternera (talk) 18:52, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, it was a mistake Amongusgamer123 (talk) 18:53, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Toketaa^talk 18:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, unfortunately I don't see how that edit could be classified as vandalism. I was simply adding to the article. At the end of the day, I believe that this is what Wikipedia is all about. Please refrain from reverting my constructive edits and, while you may think the contrary is true, I can assure you, it is not. Thanks, Amongusgamer123 Amongusgamer123 (talk) 19:01, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Personal stories aren't supposed to be on Wikipedia. Toketaa^talk 19:03, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I completely respect and appreciate your decision to remove my addition for this reason. However, this is simply not true and is not a valid reason for a reversion. There are many examples of personal stories that can be found on Wikipedia. I'll give you an example. There is, for instance, the Wikipedia page about Jill Ireland. Here is the link: Jill Ireland - Wikipedia. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Ireland) In this article, you can clearly see that there is a specific section dedicated to her person life. So, if you would like to remove my personal story, why don't you go and remove her biography. Thanks once again, Amongusgamer123 Amongusgamer123 (talk) 19:08, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a major difference between that personal story and your'es. You're personal story is not notable enough for wikipedia. Toketaa^talk 19:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, firstly I'd quickly like to make a small correction on your part. You said "your'es". While I'm not completely sure what you may have intended to mean by this, I'm going to make the forgiving assumption that you meant to say yours. Additionally, you also said "you're". I am also not privileged with the information regarding what this means. However, once again I am going to make a forgiving assumption. I will assume you said "your". It is clear that English must not be your first language, so I will move on.

Anyway, I remain to be unclear on exactly what you are referring to with this allegation of there being a 'major difference'. I would appreciate it greatly if you could quickly point out this said difference between the personal stories. Thanks, Amongusgamer123 (talk) 19:18, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is simply because you aren't notable and she is. Also are you using chatGPT? These paragraphs of arguing don't line up with your username. Toketaa^talk 19:20, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I will begin by saying that I am not using ChatGPT. If you would like to, you are welcome to run it through an AI language detector. I do appreciate the compliment though, despite your insult to my remarkably astounding username.

Regarding my notability, I disagree wholeheartedly. I, for one, would argue that that is a completely blatantly rude statement to make to me and I would appreciate it if we could refrain from such insulting language. Please do not insult my notability ever again. Thanks, Amongusgamer123 (talk) 19:24, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Toketaa^talk 19:28, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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 for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Courcelles (talk) 19:30, 26 January 2024 (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).

Amongusgamer123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I did nothing wrong??? Amongusgamer123 (talk) 19:32, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

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. RickinBaltimore (talk) 19:40, 26 January 2024 (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 know that you didn't read the guide to appealing blocks... Toketaa^talk 19:40, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]