User talk:2603:6000:B800:EB4:E4D1:7F1F:141F:1EB3

March 2024
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Megamind has an edit summary that appears to be inadequate, inaccurate, or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. Personhumanperson (talk) 14:52, 14 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia : the encyclopedia that keeps being bullshit towards me. 2603:6000:B800:EB4:E4D1:7F1F:141F:1EB3 (talk) 14:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

 Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 6 months for block evasion. 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:. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:56, 14 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I genuinely do not understand why the editors on this site are ok with this edit (which are I initially put on which was altered to quote unquote "better match the standards the site has." Yet they aren't allowing a objectively better version of the edit without elaborating on anything wrong with it. Regarding the block evasion excuse I was initially banned for over 200 days straight. You people forced me into "block evading" when I really had no intentions at all to do anything harmful to this sites information. 2603:6000:B800:EB4:E4D1:7F1F:141F:1EB3 (talk) 14:59, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * We didn't force you into anything; nothing is requiring you to edit the Wikipedia page about a fourteen-year-old animated movie. I assume you've seen my response on my and the article's talk page, but just in case you didn't: The section prominently cites videos by a random Youtube channel for no apparent reason. Youtube is not a reliable source, and putting the channel's name prominently in the prose, and your insistence in trying to force it into the article, leads me to believe that your intent is to promote this Youtube channel rather than to improve the encyclopedia. That's more justification for a revert than WP:BLOCKEVASION requires, of course, but nevertheless. You're well aware of how to appeal your block, and your insistence on not doing so only makes any future appeal that much harder to accept. Again, this is about an animated movie that's fourteen years old; you could just stop trying to edit it. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 15:06, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The source is not directly from youtube. It is from the internet archive. About the film being 14 years old it recently got new media in its franchise so I don't see how it can't be edited atleast a little bit. 2603:6000:B800:EB4:E4D1:7F1F:141F:1EB3 (talk) 15:08, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * About "appealing my block" everytime even when I admitted I was wrong they for some reason rejected me. 2603:6000:B800:EB4:E4D1:7F1F:141F:1EB3 (talk) 15:10, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Once again why I included the mention of the video in the first place was so it could give readers a idea as to why it has a cult following in the first place. It's not due to just the internet memes it has received. It was also the critical re-valuation by many people. 2603:6000:B800:EB4:E4D1:7F1F:141F:1EB3 (talk) 15:13, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Somewhat unrelated but regarding what you said about "promoting him." I put on the edit involving him specifically due to having a notable opinion of the film while also giving a idea to readers as to why the film gained a cult following in the first place. If I included the words of a random critic from some other site would that be considered "promoting" him? 2603:6000:B800:EB4:E4D1:7F1F:141F:1EB3 (talk) 15:06, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hmm now I remember this note from you. That was so long ago--should have been plenty of time for you to read and even memorize WP:RS. I am going to revoke talk page access. Drmies (talk) 15:15, 14 March 2024 (UTC)