User talk:XBOXaddict

——————————————— userTALK: XBOXaddict —————————————

Great Run[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Great Run. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. NawlinWiki (talk) 00:20, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was removing redlinks, and I'm so bored so I'm doing them one by one. --XBOXaddict (talk) 00:21, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, thanks. NawlinWiki (talk) 00:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Autoconfirmed = account is 4 days old and has made at least 10 edits. NawlinWiki (talk) 02:30, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Autoconfirmed[edit]

Hello, XBOXaddict. You have new messages at NawlinWiki's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:02, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You recent page moves[edit]

Do not move or rename a page by copying/pasting its content, because doing so destroys the edit history. (The GFDL requires acknowledgement of all contributors, and editors continue to hold copyright on their contributions unless they specifically give up this right. Hence it is required that edit histories be preserved for all major contributions until the normal copyright expires.)

If you find a cut-and-paste move that needs to be fixed, please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen to have an administrator take care of the problem. -danngarcia (talk) 12:12, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was difficult because when I try to move it back to "(Philippine TV series)", it implies that there is already a page named as that. The policy says that I can either contact an administrator, or I can do the job manually - and that is what I did.

ANd you cannot use "(2009 Philipppine TV series)", haven't you seen the typo error? It has 3 P in the Philippines. This is exactly why I got all messed up with the moving. --XBOXaddict (talk) 12:25, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As per Wikipedia policy, if you have problems moving a page, you can always ask an admin for help. There are Pinoy admins here who are willing to help you in case you have messed up the page moves. We are trying to preserve the edit history of these pages since some of them were edited several times before. -danngarcia (talk) 12:30, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I've been meaning to find filipino admins here. --XBOXaddict (talk) 12:35, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Corazon Aquino[edit]

I'm sorry that you think I hate her or Filipinos, I don't and I have the greatest respect for her, but the fact of the matter is, do you see the sort of detail you went into on any other peoples entries - No. And clearly Miesianiacal agrees, he reverted some of your edits too. Wikipedia has to be neutral, she may have been a great woman and I've read all about her husband but, for the purposes of wikipedia she is just another woman. If you have any problems with this, please raise it on this page, I think I will.

Highfields (talk, contribs) 14:35, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I don't claim to own wikipedia, and I don't claim to be the one everybody has to follow and I am quite offended by your accusations, but look at it rationally, it's not included for anyone else, why should it be for her, I know she was a wonderful woman but we have to be neutral. Wikipedia's Neutrality policy says, The tone of Wikipedia articles should be impartial, neither endorsing nor rejecting a particular point of view - your edits clearly endorse her.

Accusing people of vandalism is also a very offensive and serious matter. As for your point on the 2 bushes, it is actually confusing because a stranger reading the text would assume it was Bush Sr and Bush Jr, which it isnt. The only way of knowing that is to read the caption, wheras you can tell she's the first Filipino by the flags. And try to remember, the content of Filipino gameshows isn't always the best criteria for wikipedia inclusion.

Highfields (talk, contribs) 15:01, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

August 2009[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edit(s) to Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 22:13, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2009[edit]

Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to May Bukas Pa. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 15:58, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which edit exactly? --XBOXaddict (talk) 16:51, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did with this edit to May Bukas Pa. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 22:39, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not trying to make you look like the bad guy here, but by using the sentence, "If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia." combined with a image. I just felt terrible for being accused as a violator of Wikiepdia pages. I have done quite a lot of good-faith edits on the past days that I have been contributing. You could have just left me an information or an advise, but blackmailing me? Not exactly a blackmail, but it works the same way. I just wanted to tell you that your choice of words for a first warning isn't very pleasing. Instead of letting the person be advised on what to do, you just scare them away.

Into the issue. How exactly is my edit unsourced. I have been waiting for the reply of the administrator above to explain what the matter about these "sources" is really about. All of my edits are taken from the show's website itself. I couldn't possibly insert the website as a reference for every single edit that I do, could I? I am an avid fan of the show and watches it almost every night.

Elmer Pitpitan: There are no any Elmer Pitpitan mentioned on the credits of the show. The name of the child being described on the summary in the article is Miguelito de Guzman.

Summary: Most of the time, I copy and paste the chapter summaries from the website, although changes are being done to avoid copyright infringements. Sometimes I also write the summary myself based on what I have watched from the show.

I believe these are the only edits that you have been complaining about. I would await for your reply. Please don't take what I have said the wrong way. I just wanted to be civil from editing in Wikipedia, although for a first warning...it doesn't really sound nice.--XBOXaddict (talk) 02:14, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That was a level 3 warning, using language approved by WikiProject user warnings. Please see Template:Uw-unsor3 and Template:Huggle/warn-unsor-3 for details. — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 02:29, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for adding unsourced or original content, as you did to May Bukas Pa. If you continue this activity you will be blocked from editing. For your reference this was the edit. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 11:30, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case[edit]

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Witchy2006 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 11:43, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for Abusing multiple accounts: Please see: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Witchy2006. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

— Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 06:19, 4 September 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

Witchy2006 s not my account. Yes, I have 2 accounts, the KewlPix one and this. So, what exactly is the problem, I swear everyone here has more than 1 account.

Decline reason:

First, even just having KewlPix and this account is a violation of WP:SOCK. Users are expected to stick to one account unless they have a good reason. Second, if you dispute the finding of Checkusers, who are technically proficient and trustworthy, you need to explain how it is that Witchy2006 has frequently edited along the same lines that you do and shares an IP address with you, yet you are not the same user. Mango juice^talk 15:19, 3 September 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

I apologize for what I have done and promise that it won't happen again. I didn't know that making multiple accounts is against the rules. I thought Wikiepdia is just another Youtube or Yahoo Messenger. I am sorry and it won't happen again. About the Witchy2006 one, I don't really know what to answer. Mufka said that we have the same interest in May bukas Pa, and so are a lot of other people as seen on its History page. Plus, May Bukas Pa is not the only page I edit. If you see on my user page, those are the article that I most likely to edit, not just May Bukas Pa. And about the "playing dumb" he said, I am serious about that question. I didn't understand what he meant by adding sources.

Decline reason:

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a social site. Anyway, yes, many people are interested in this subject, but all of them are limiting their editing to a single account. A "confirmed" checkuser result means that you are either the same person as Witchy2006, or are sharing the same computer as Witchy2006 to edit these articles, which constitutes meatpuppetry and is handled the same way. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:55, 3 September 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

I dont even understand this "Checkuser" thing, how does this work? Yes I edit May Bukas Pa a little too much...well there other IPs who edits it minute per minute if you look on its history page. I have no idea about the Witchy2006 issue. I said I was sorry about the KewlPix account, that was my only other account and nothing else. The internet I use is a shared in a dormitorium. Please unblock me, or atleast lift my block for days or even weeks or so. Please.

Decline reason:

Declined, following Hersfold's confirmation of sockpuppetry (below) — Tivedshambo (t/c) 22:10, 3 September 2009 (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.

See Wikipedia:Checkuser. It's a tool that lets us look at your Internet Protocol address and some other technical information that can be used to distinguish between two different people on a shared address. Because of this, it's rather restricted access, so I can't tell you much more than that. I'll take a second look at this with checkuser now, and see what I come up with. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:45, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I endorse the

Confirmed result. It's extremely unlikely you and Witchy2006 are different people. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:50, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:PHRbudBrothers.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:PHRbudBrothers.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:06, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:KatorseABSCBN.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:KatorseABSCBN.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:34, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]