User talk:Alacante45

Kung Pow
I am totally baffled by your message as to why I did not cite a source in my edit. I deleted an opinionary phrase that had no citation at and was merely someone offering opinion to the effect of "the film is considered a classic by fans of the genre" What sort of citation would I be putting (!!??) (24.62.126.170 (talk) 08:55, 26 September 2010 (UTC))

No it wasn't, you put in It is considered to be one of the funniest films of its genre. Now that seems like a sentence to cite to me.Alacante45 (talk) 16:44, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Ummm...No, I did not put in that sentence I deleted a sentence like that. I have absolutely no clue what you are going on about. I think perhaps you need to re-read the history carefully. (Alacante45 (talk) 16:44, 27 September 2010 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.62.126.170 (talk) 10:00, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind. Sorry for wasting your time. Alacante45 (talk) 16:44, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
Your article submission has been declined, and Wikipedia& was not created. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer, and please feel free to resubmit once the issues have been addressed. (You can do this by adding the text to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Alacante45 (talk) 16:44, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Your message
I have replied on my talk page. Joshinda26 (talk) 16:11, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Are you nuts?! I was REVERTING vandalism. Check the edit.
If you look at my edit, I REVERTED vandalism by an anonymous IP. Please take a look at my edit.

If you continue to make outrageous and frivolous accusations of vandalism, YOU will be the one who is blocked indefinitely. Conduct yourself accordingly. --Coolcaesar (talk) 16:12, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Inappropriate use of tags and random chatter in articles
Please don't add random chatter and tags to articles as you have done on Algae. You might want to learn how to use tags better by reading the ones you use.

"This article may be confusing or unclear to readers. Please help clarify the article; suggestions may be found on the talk page."
 * If you find an article confusing, write what is confusing you on the talk page, or tag individual sections. But, don't add confusing stuff, then label it confusing because of what you added.

"This article may be too long to read and navigate comfortably. Please consider splitting content into sub-articles and using this article for a summary of the key points of the subject. (October 2010)"
 * Common sense means that when a topic is long, its primary article may be long, while sections that already have major articles themselves may already exist. If you disagree with this, discuss it on the talk page.

--184.99.172.218 (talk) 16:17, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

The Effects on Humans part of the Article is OK.

Algae
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Algae. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.


 * Report submitted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshinda26 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Warned the wrong person
I believe you warned the wrong person.. Looks like he reverted the same vandalism you were aiming for.-- Kubigula (talk) 16:45, 3 October 2010 (UTC) I know about this, I looked at the wrong side. Alacante45 (talk) 16:48, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

October 2010
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule&#32;at Algae. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   17:04, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Further attempts to evade your block, as you did with User:Whistleblowerrrr will result in this block being increased. Mr.Z-man 17:43, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Your block has been extended to 48 hours for further disruption on User talk:78.146.9.192. If you want to request an unblock, do so on this page. Mr.Z-man 17:49, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Can I just ask that will I be blocked indefinitely or for another 48 hours once it expires?Alacante45 (talk) 17:23, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

AN/I report
I have filed a report about your misuse of WP:Twinkle at AN/I requesting that you be blocked from using this editing tool until you have a sufficient understanding of wikipedia policies and procedures to allow you to use it appropriately. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Misuse_of_editing_tool_twinkle.2C_edit_warring.2C_civility_issues.2C_etc. AN/I report] --184.99.172.218 (talk) 17:10, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Your Reversion on Bahubali
I think you accidentally warned the wrong person. If I recall correctly, I merely corrected the syntax of the article. Someone had mistakenly forgotten a space between a period and the beginning of a subtitle heading, so I simply added the space so that it wouldn't look like this in the article (I'm not sure what the actual sentence was but this is basically what happened):

Lorem ipsum.== See Also ==

After your reversion, it appears that someone put my minor change back into the article. I think this is a case of someone signed into an account reverting edits made by a user who wasn't signed in (I'm ABarnes94 but I wasn't logged in at the time and it seemed a waste to sign in for a quick edit). Please don't assume that every edit from a person who isn't logged in is malicious - remember, WP:AGF. I hope this is just a misunderstanding, but you don't seem to have a very good history judging by your talk page. 173.68.194.36 (talk) 20:48, 3 October 2010 (UTC) It all kicked off yesterday.2.97.73.116 (talk) 17:02, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Twinkle use
As per the WP:ANI thread regarding your use of twinkle, you are close to getting it revoked. Please stop being so overzealous warning users because 1. you are warning the wrong people in several instances and 2. it is not helpful. Tom my! 00:09, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * These are problematic, , and . And read WP:VAND. Tom my! 00:23, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

More IP addresses now maybe adding malware links to Algae article
This user continues to add his reverted text to the Algae article, see its history here, using IP addresses. --184.99.172.218 (talk) 17:23, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Semi-Protection of Algae article requested
I have requested semi-protection of the Algae article to prevent you from continuing to add what appears to be either a virus link or a spam URL to the article.

You won't be able to sell your product on wikipedia, as your spam/viral links will be reverted immediately in high visibility articles, and you will wind up blocked for continuing to add them, as you have been.

Please stop vandalizing wikipedia. --184.99.172.218 (talk) 17:30, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Alacante45's latest sock
Alacante sock:.

You're not the first youngster who got blocked on wikipedia, then created a bunch of socks. How boring. --184.99.172.218 (talk) 06:13, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Aw, man. How are the admins gonna find me now? It's not that somebody like Explicit would just walk onto my talk page right now! Laughing stock. :0 Oracle Orb (talk) 17:49, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent sockpuppetry, block evasion, and other disruption. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:01, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Can't catch me!!!!!! It&#39;s The Slave (talk) 16:41, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

You blocked me on 86.135.170.30, but I'm now on 78.146.9.192. Later,folks! It&#39;s The Slave (talk) 16:46, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

If you wish to be unblocked, send an email to unblock-en-l@lists.wikimedia.org. . NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 03:50, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you are familiar with the contents of WP:MINOR, and believe that it is still beneficial to the encyclopedia to have all your edits marked as such by default, then this discussion will give you the details you need to continue with this functionality indefinitely. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:11, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Princess Anne Hospital concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Princess Anne Hospital, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements. If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13. Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 15:21, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Your article submission Princess Anne Hospital


Hello Alacante45. It has now been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Princess Anne Hospital.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the  or  code. Please note, however, that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code:, paste it in the edit box at this link , click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Rankersbo (talk) 07:32, 1 September 2013 (UTC)