User talk:Daxtonlab

Welcome[edit]

Hello Daxtonlab and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your contributions, such as the ones to Joyce Byers, do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox (but beware that the contents of the sandbox are deleted frequently) rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a Help desk, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
Help pages
Tutorial
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing?

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Drmies (talk) 00:42, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reply 188.3.3.120 (talk) 11:10, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Bon Secours Wellness Arena. 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. NO--these are wikilinks; they are not promotional. And removing .com, what is that supposed to do? Drmies (talk) 00:45, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please this edits that i made is to help the community but you didn't get to read it the Islam especially I was using the pew research 2020 facts Daxtonlab (talk) 00:47, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They didn't help the community: it is not a good idea to start making copyedits when you, as it seems, do not have a full understanding of the English language or of Wikipedia's guidelines. Drmies (talk) 03:16, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear check user administrator please I have send check user email about my block can you please tell me when they will respond to me I sent last week.Thank you Daxtonlab (talk) 00:51, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you are talking about--are you asking me this? What block? You're editing, aren't you? Drmies (talk) 03:16, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am editing but I have limited amount of time.I have sent block exemption for my IP. but I can only edit in the night.look at my account I am blocked partial by bot that is why I rush to edit but not explaining what my summary of editing is about because if i don't do that I will get blocked. can you please give me an IP exemption. Daxtonlab (talk) 08:42, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

please I don't know how to get you to help unblock my account from the bots and you can really see from my editing is not disruptive I sent an appeal to administrators to help me with my block one administrator gave me check users email to send my complain. till today they haven't responded to me yet and I came to meet your page and boom I saw you are check user and arbitrary council please don't leave me hanging.if you don't want to unblock please let me know and if you want to help me to unblock my account let me know.is been a week please I want to know about my outcome of my account. Daxtonlab (talk) 13:12, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I can see you're trying to edit through ranges that are blocked as proxies, but there's nothing in your edits that suggests to me you are actually trying to improve Wikipedia articles--these edits are strange and unhelpful, and contrary to what you assert they are disruptive. You're adding periods to list items, replacing "website" with "publisher" parameters without actually sticking in the proper name for the publisher, you're cutting parts out of URLs. And if you want to get IP exemption, please go through the proper channels: Wikipedia:IP block exemption. Drmies (talk) 16:14, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I went there last time I was rejected by the administrators Daxtonlab (talk) 16:41, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023[edit]

Hello, I'm Chaotic Enby. I noticed that you recently removed content from Integromics 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. ChaotıċEnby(talk) 11:16, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. At least one of your edits on the page Ernest Debrah, while it may have been in good faith, was difficult to distinguish from vandalism. To help other editors understand the reason for the changes, you can use an edit summary for your contributions. You can also take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. User:Namiba 18:48, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

what is vandalism here. you go to other pages there is eternal links not sources and reference improvement people can click on it and understand it that is what you can see i was doing Daxtonlab (talk) 18:54, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do sincerely apologise for my behaviour towards your corrections i don't know what came until me and started fighting with you.i have been most of time good .thanks for your fixing of my attitude Daxtonlab (talk) 20:50, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Daxtonlab, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages that you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia or the Tutorial
Create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
How to add those all-important references
Simplified style guide

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. Again, If you need help visit the Teahouse or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! We are so glad you are here! Sm8900 (talk) 18:37, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there I am very excited to be here fellow Wikipedian and I am very happy that you said hello I know you are having a nice day Daxtonlab (talk) 18:46, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category deletion[edit]

Please be careful to not delete the categories when editing an article. Examples: Abena Osei Asare, Paul Evans Aidoo. --Bamyers99 (talk) 21:13, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

okay I will be more careful thanks for the warnings Daxtonlab (talk) 21:51, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

please sometimes isn't my fault it is my visual editing I don't delete anything but visual editing delete stuffs that I don't want to delete and not always my fault Daxtonlab (talk) 15:06, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Empty references sections[edit]

Please stop adding empty references sections to articles. References sections are only used in articles which have references. Regards, Dan Bloch (talk) 06:53, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop[edit]

Please stop adding empty References section. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:48, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Kwabena Appiah-Pinkrah. 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. Please stop overlinking--and if you claim to be improving references, actually improve them please. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 02:09, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Edward Michael Ennin. Will you please STOP linking such common words as "Christian" and "marriage"? Thank you. Drmies (talk) 02:11, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Or "Muslim", or "politician", or "faith", or "lawyer". These are all perfectly ordinary words. Drmies (talk) 02:16, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please read WP:Overlink. Also, what to do other than WP:editwarring in a content dispute. thanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:13, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- - but if you look at the reverted he didn't revert that he just said that. That is small portion but majority of the reverted is linked to people like succession and predicession of the MP and political party links and I was explaining the undoing before it gets reverted again that is not content dispute. Daxtonlab (talk) 20:10, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    - And yet you violated OVERLINK in all your reverts. Drmies (talk) 22:37, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 17:23, 27 December 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).

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

Request reason:

I didn't commit any Disruptive I just undid what Drmies accuse me of doing linking unnecessary stuff but if you look at the links it links real pages . everything I linked followed Wikipedia policy please I have not done anything wrong and I am innocent. Daxtonlab (talk) 17:39, 27 December 2023 (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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:07, 29 December 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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here I am sorry for over linking and I do apologize for my reaction and not talking about it can I get a second chance if you come back and check that I am doing all over again you can block me. thank you

Decline reason:

Please describe concisely and clearly how your edits merited a block, what you would do differently, and what constructive edits you would make. Please read Wikipedia's Guide to appealing blocks for more information. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:50, 18 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.