User talk:1mikie19

October 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. McDoobAU93 (talk) 22:08, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Please do not add your assertion to the article again unless you can provide a reference. Thank you.  Kuru  talk  23:13, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Kuru talk  18:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

November 2008
Please do not add unsourced or original content. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Gladys J Cortez 00:01, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. And it's not nice to impersonate your mother.  Acroterion  (talk)  01:47, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Citing sources please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Note that your edit also removed text that had a proper attribution. (This also refers to the edit you apparently made from 68.90.80.132 link) Thank you. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:20, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Again, please cite your source, and don't delete the existing text without specifying a reason in the edit summary. Thanks, -- Gyrofrog (talk) 05:19, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 17:51, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Good Night Show edits
You really need to READ what you edit before hitting "Save". You changed "second" to "third" re: the season number, then changed it to "will premiere"--but you didn't change any of the stuff that came after, so after your change it said that the THIRD season will debut with stuff that already happened at the beginning of the SECOND season. I'm assuming good faith here, but all the same this is a warning to be more careful when you edit, so you're not adding something or changing it so that it makes no sense. Sense is important. GJC 01:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Backyardigans and Nick Jr edits
I don't know what, exactly, you're trying to do. Why would you create a header for a season which currently doesn't exist {The Backyardigans) or change the end date from "present"--which is perfectly correct--to "2008" which will only be correct for a very short time before it would need to be changed to 2009??? I'm afraid this is going to have to serve as a final warning. You may not INTEND to be disruptive, but when your editing requires people to clean up after nearly every change you make, that's disruptive no matter WHAT you intend. GJC 01:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

BLOCKED
I tried to steer you in the right direction, but it's becoming clear that you're not willing to listen to suggestions. After your latest disruptive edits to The Backyardigans, I have blocked you. If you wish to appeal this block, instructions can be found here. Please note that once the block expires or you are unblocked, continuing to edit disruptively will only result in longer and longer blocks. I STRONGLY suggest you explore our Adopt-a-User program, in which experienced Wikipedians can assist you in becoming a better editor. GJC 02:45, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

this message is for GJC i just added Season Premieres and Season Finales on them


 * Yes, and they were incorrect and had to be reverted by another user. This is the sort of thing I'm talking about; you make edits without checking the facts and other users need to clean up after you. You need to CHECK to make sure you're adding the correct info BEFORE you make it. This is what I've been attempting to communicate all along--and I find it funny that you had to be BLOCKED before you even acknowledged any of these messages. As I said--I recommend that you find a more-experienced user over at the Adopt-a-User program, someone who you can run edits past before you make them, who will tell you if they're likely to be a problem. GJC 07:32, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

So I'm Blocked until tomorrow.


 * That is correct, yes. GJC 03:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

While we're reflecting on edits, I'm curious as to why you keep editing Six Flags Fiesta Texas and Rattler (roller coaster) to say that Rattler is being demolished. Nobody in the theme park community has even suggested it would be removed. Even if a rumor site were to suggest it was to be removed, it still wouldn't belong here until a local paper or similar official source (even Fiesta Texas itself) made such a statement. I heartily suggest that you follow GJC's advice about how you edit. Thank you. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 03:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Somebody told me that it was going to be demolished so I added the information. McDoobAU93 only
 * Okay. Read this: Reliable Sources. This is a Wikipedia policy--translation, "It's a rule. Not optional." You will notice, in the policy I just gave you, that "Somebody told me..." is not mentioned ANYWHERE as being reliable. "Somebody" could tell you that the sky was green, the Pope was an atheist, or that it snows in the summer in Florida--and you certainly wouldn't add THAT, would you?? (Please don't say yes.) You have to be able to find the information you're adding in BOOKS, NEWSPAPERS, MAGAZINES, or on TV NEWS (not "Extra" or "Entertainment Tonight" or "The O'Reilly Factor", either--news that gives actual FACTS, not opinions or rumors.) If you can point to any one of these sources, and tell who said it and where and when, you're probably in good shape adding it to the article. Otherwise, not so much. And adding stuff to articles about TV shows is probably one of the worst places for you right now, because most of what you can add will be stuff you saw yourself--not stuff that was reported somewhere else first. "Stuff you saw yourself" is called, here on Wikipedia, "Original Research" and adding it to articles is a BIG no-no. Seriously, stick with some area a little bit more fact-based...science or sports or something like that. (Sports is generally a good place to start, because it's based on statistics and it's kinda hard to argue about statistics--either the score was 41-4 or it wasn't, you know??) Anything where there's a lot of PUBLISHED information about the topic is a good place to start, too--but stuff where you're counting on "somebody told me" or "I saw in this episode...." is gonna be sticky ground, for sure. GJC 01:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, let's go a step further. Let's say you know someone who works for a demolition company, and they say, "Dude, we're gonna tear down Rattler tomorrow!" Let's assume he's a trustworthy soul and has never lied before and has no reason to lie now. You still can't add that to Wikipedia because another editor, such as myself, cannot verify that. I don't know your friend or know how trustworthy he is. Now, when a local paper or television station runs a story about the demolition of Rattler, then you can edit the article to say that is has occurred. At the same time, you add the citation identifying the source of the information. This way, another editor can read the article themselves and confirm that it is indeed what has occurred. (It has happened where someone has added a citation to an edit, but upon reading the cited item, it didn't say what the editor revised the article to say.)


 * A case in point: I'm a roller coaster fan, so I keep track of and edit a lot of coaster articles. One that's my pride and joy (because I helped start it) is Manta, a new roller coaster under construction here in my city. There's been tons of rumors about it for ages, but none of it belonged in the article ... because they were just that: rumors. Only when published information appeared did it get added.


 * If I were you, I'd consider myself lucky that I had so many people interested in helping you become a better editor. Personally, it's a fun project to work on, and I hope you are able to discover that, as well.


 * McDoobAU93 (talk) 02:46, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * PS Since I'm presuming that you're in the San Antonio area, you're six hours behind UTC. I'm on the east coast, so I'm five hours behind it.

wait a minute it said when i'm unblocked in December 3, why does it say December 4 for GJC
 * Wikipedia uses Universal time.  Acroterion  (talk)  01:38, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I can't wait to ride Manta when it opens I live in Florida.


 * So you can relate to my dilemma regarding the Manta article. You are excited and want to spread the word about it. However, the word needs to be based in fact, not in rumor. If anything, the project has helped me read more, to read different sites, to look for sources in unusual places (even old school papers I wrote in high school). Anything to make the articles better, as long as it makes them right. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 03:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * PS When you add a comment, be sure to add the four tildes to document the time you respond. Admittedly it's not required, but it sure helps a lot, and it's really important on the discussion pages for the articles, so people know who made certain comments.

FETCH!
Why did change the infobox of Fetch with Ruff Ruffman to Fetch with Scruff Ruffman? It was just one episode! And the infobox is about the tv show, not the tv show inside the tv show! Elbutler (talk) 17:17, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I thought that Scruff was gonna take over the show now that Ruff is fired.

December 2008
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. GJC 18:24, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Look. I don't know if you're actually a kid, or if you just don't get what I'm saying, or what. But I would like you to explain both the FETCH edit and the Bart Simpson edit where you added "Bart is very funny". Can you explain HOW on earth those two edits fit with the policies I quoted to you above?? I am trying to be patient here--anyone else would have blocked you indefinitely by now. Honestly, I'm pretty close to that point myself--as I said, you're apparently NOT understanding the information I'm giving you. GJC 18:27, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

He is funny


 * That is NOT THE POINT. Wikipedia is not a place to put your opinions--it is an ENCYCLOPEDIA. I'm sorry. I don't think I can help you if you don't even have a grasp of that basic concept. GJC 23:28, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

what should i do to edit


 * I'm sorry that it came to you having even your talk page blocked, but now maybe you'll understand that this is not the way to behave. In four or five years, try contacting an admin by e-mail and make your case for unblocking. Templarion (talk) 03:34, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

please do not edit United High School(texas) if you continue to do so you will be blocked from editing Thank You 1mikie19talk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.8.163.91 (talk) 19:45, 3 January 2009 (UTC)