User talk:Puppies$Toasters999

June 2021[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Toaster have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Toaster was changed by Puppies$Toasters999 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.952205 on 2021-06-30T00:24:27+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 00:24, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Rdp060707. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Vibranium, 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. ----Rdp060707|talk 00:43, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Toaster. 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. Your picture that you claimed is a "more modern" toaster is anything but. The description clearly states that this toaster is older than the one we already show, and it certainly looks it. And please read WP:MINOR Meters (talk) 05:34, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Wilderness therapy, you may be blocked from editing. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 06:02, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Puppies$Toasters999, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Star Wars: The Bad Batch did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Introduction tutorial
Contributing to Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Help pages
Simplified Manual of Style
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need personal help ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. Yeeno (talk) 🍁 03:28, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bad batch edits[edit]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please help me with... I wrote a lot on the bad batch article. You removed it because I did not cite a source. But I did not get any info from a source. I have just watched the show about 10 times. If you check all the info is correct. I understand I need a source though, should I just put myself as the source? I would love to get my writing back up, please tell me how Puppies$Toasters999 (talk) 04:29, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, you should not add yourself as a source. We only publish information from reliable sources, not someone who's watched a show a few times. If you can't find the information you wanted to publish in a good source, don't add it. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 04:47, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what your saying. Your not sure if I am a reliable source. Understandable. Where do I go on Wikipedia to prove my credibility? Or alternatively should I add something like unverified facts at the end of my edits. Puppies$Toasters999 (talk) 05:48, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure: you're not. Wikipedia is not the place to publish your own research. You need to be able to cite actual reliable sources. Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 06:01, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So what kinds of people do you trust. Because if I have to be a celebrity I think I could do it ( I might need a few months) but if your talking government official I don’t think I will ever get there. I assume you can use direct quotes because those are reliable. Can I quote myself? All of these rules are very confusing. To be honest I just want to help people get correct information. I mean I trust myself more than a website. I feel like I would know if I was lying but I might not know if a website was lying. You see what I mean. Thanks so much to responding to my endless questions. I know looking for errors on Wikipedia is not a job… but if it was I would give you my highest recommendation. Puppies$Toasters999 (talk) 06:19, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2021[edit]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.

Your job as a Wikipedia editor is to summarize what reliable sources say about a topic. Adding your own personal interpretations is forbidden by policy. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:43, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for not responding in time, though please know that users are often not available to respond to your queries instantly. I'll add on to here: Since you want to put some information about a TV show, there are people who write about TV for a living that we cite on Wikipedia. These people write reviews of episodes or shows for reputable websites like GamesRadar or news organizations like Global News. Here are some examples for you to look at:

‘Star Wars: The Bad Batch’ review: Good guys go for broke in ‘Clone Wars’ follow-up - National | Globalnews.ca
Star Wars: The Bad Batch episode 6 review: "Things are left hanging ominously overhead" | GamesRadar+

We summarize information in these sources into articles, and then cite them to give credit to the author and source.

You may be blocked from editing, but feel free to continue asking questions here! Yeeno (talk) 🍁 07:00, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My response: I understand that I was recently blocked due to me quoting myself (is this correct?) I reached out to someone else to see if I could quote myself but they did not respond. So I went ahead and did it. So just to be clear… I can’t quote myself even when I am an expert in that topic.

My recent blocking[edit]

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).

Puppies$Toasters999 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand that I was recently blocked due to me quoting myself (is this correct?) I reached out to someone else to see if I could quote myself but they did not respond. So I went ahead and did it. So just to be clear… I can’t quote myself even when I am an expert in that topic. Puppies$Toasters999 (talk) 06:58, 30 June 2021 (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. Yamla (talk) 09:57, 30 June 2021 (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.

Wikipedia is not for users to post their personal accounts of topics, that is what social media is for. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that summarizes what independent reliable sources state, for verification purposes. 331dot (talk) 07:44, 30 June 2021 (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).

Puppies$Toasters999 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I believe I can write a competent article with sources. Here I go. We first meet Echo (Season 1 Episode 5) and the fellow members of his clone group on the small moon of Rishi. This is where he meets Captain Rex and Commander Cody (Season 1 Episode 5) They meet after Commander Cody and Captain Rex have been forced off the main platforms by droid commandos. "The name's Rex. But you'll call me "Captain" or "sir"." - Captain Rex talking to Echo, Heavy, and Fives. How was that. I provided direct quotes and sourcesPuppies$Toasters999 (talk) 00:46, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Plot summaries do not need a source, as they can be verified by watching the show/film itself. Any claims about the show, however, do need a source. You haven't demonstrated your ability to properly source information. See referencing for beginners, as well as the five pillars of Wikipedia. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 08:03, 1 July 2021 (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.

Welcome[edit]

Hello Puppies$Toasters999! I'm not a Wikipedia administrator, but I could tell that you're having some trouble. Here are a few things that I hope will help you out:

wizzito | say hello! 03:19, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Puppies$Toasters999 (talk) 03:19, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]