User talk:Byates5637

Talk here

ok --StormCommander (talk) 03:39, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

lmao u baddies Squarepush3r (talk) 08:20, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prod[edit]

Hello, I removed your prod on Scott Stevens (weatherman) as the article has been previously proposed for deletion and therefore isn't eligible for a prod deletion. If you still believe it should be deleted then an afd will be required. Thank you. Rotten regard Softnow 18:42, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'm not that familiar with the deletion process and just researching it as I go. I have submitted to afd. Is there an easy way to tell if an article has been prodded before? Byates5637 (talk) 14:59, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Byates5637. You have new messages at Talk:Attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi.
Message added 14:08, 28 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Can you comment on this? FutureTrillionaire (talk) 14:08, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome![edit]

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Byates5637. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! – S. Rich (talk) 03:23, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2014[edit]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Your recent talk page comments on Talk:Stefan Molyneux were not added to the bottom of the page. New discussion page messages and topics should always be added to the bottom. Your message may have been moved by another user. In the future you can use the "New section" link in top right. For more details see talk page guidelines. Not a big issue. I've moved your comment to the bottom of the page and added a reply. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 03:25, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks S. Rich. I've dabbled in editing over the years but never *really* learned formal wiki protocol. I appreciate the guidance. Byates5637 (talk) 13:50, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Nononsenseplease (talk) 04:15, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alert[edit]

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding pseudoscience and fringe science, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Jytdog (talk) 00:36, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Really dude? get a life man

Yes, really. Pseudoscience is a topic of perennial disruption in Wikipedia, and Vaxxed is unambiguously within that topic. You have been given notice; you will do well to act accordingly but you will of course chart your own course. Jytdog (talk) 00:45, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you really threatening me with a "wikipedia notice" ? Dude.

Not a threat. Information. Jytdog (talk) 01:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war warning[edit]

Your recent editing history at Vaxxed 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. Jytdog (talk) 00:37, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

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. Jytdog (talk) 01:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing 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.

Kuru (talk) 04:00, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Starting another edit war on a second article was a poor choice. You are editing in articles which are clearly contentious and under discretionary sanctions; you should take greater care to ensure you have consensus on the article's talk page before making any future reverts. Kuru (talk) 04:07, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kuru can you please clarify what edit you are talking about? Byates5637 (talk) 04:09, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your change here was reverted. You chose to continue reverting to your preferred version twice more.
Your change here removing the Gorski review was reverted. You chose to repeat the action here along with several others.
Your change here was reverted. You again reverted twice to restore your preferred wording.

Three of these reverts occurred while there was an open report of your actions at WP:ANEW. If you are unable to understand the problem, it would be advisable to avoid articles of this type. As noted, please get clear consensus for your actions when you realize they are disputed. It is also a good idea to review the article's talk pages and FAQs to see which material already has strong consensus and will obviously be contentious. Kuru (talk) 04:28, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Byates5637. You have my sympathy. I tried editing Vaxxed and I got a threatening notice too. Roberttherambler (talk) 23:43, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019[edit]

Hello, I'm INeedSupport. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Nick Foles have been undone because they 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 Help Desk. Thanks. -INeedSupport- ^:3 19:42, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]