User talk:Noway419

September 2007[edit]

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Halo 3. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. — TKD::Talk 17:28, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to Halo 3, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. — TKD::Talk 17:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for persistent insertion of text that does not adhere to neutral point of view at Halo 3. Please stop. You're welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

I should also note that you also violated the three-revert rule, an offense for which you have been previously blocked. Please stop edit warring, and bear in mind that we depend on third-party reliable sources, not Wikipedia editors, for points of view. — TKD::Talk 17:53, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Dumluckart.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Dumluckart.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:40, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:JOELPACK.gif[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:JOELPACK.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:59, 6 November 2007 (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).

Noway419 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

ok i learned the wikipedia rules which i have never read b4 and i realize my mistakes now and think i deserve another chance to edit, most of my edits are just to rpevent vandalism from my fav bands page so im sorry if there was any rule i violated but i no them now and it wont happen again so some1 unban me now plz Noway419 (talk) 03:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Obviousness of the similarity of the two accounts aside, your behavior here (changing others' comments) has been disruptive. — — TKD::Talk 04:40, 6 December 2007 (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.

Note to admins User was blocked as a sock puppet, not for inserting POV material. Cheers,Je t Lover (Report a mistake) 03:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I have a life. If I had no life, I'd be dead, wouldn't I? And one does not have to be an admin to place a sock puppet tag on a userpage. Cheers,Je t Lover (Report a mistake) 04:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

when did i say i was tlaking about u...Noway419 (talk) 04:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty obvious. Cheers,Je t Lover (Report a mistake) 04:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. Please use this talk page in a constructive, civil manner, instead of disrupting. If you continue to make unconstructive edits to this talk page, the page will be temporarily protected, and you would be unable to communicate with others. Do not remove the sock puppet tag. Cheers,Je t Lover (Report a mistake) 04:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You must use this talk page in a constructive, civil manner, instead of disrupting. If you make any more unconstructive edits to this talk page, the page will be temporarily protected, and you would be unable to communicate with others.

Speedy deletion nomination of Not Far from Home[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Not Far from Home requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a musical recording which does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and where the artist's article does not exist or is eligible for deletion itself. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for music.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 11:43, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]