User talk:Hits hits/Archive

= March 2013 =

Hello Hits hits, and welcome to Wikipedia. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.


 * You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and a cited source. You can read about this at Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
 * Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Close paraphrasing. (There is a college level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
 * Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Copyrights. You may also want to review Copy-paste.
 * In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
 * Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied without attribution. If you want to copy from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Your contributed article, List of Max Steel episodes (2013)
You created this by copying contents from another article but didn't provide the required attributions as required by policy described in WP:CWW and the procedure described in WP:PROSPLIT. If you wish to split this few episodes into a separate article propose a split on the main article talk page - see WP:SPLIT for more. I think it is too soon. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:10, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Please don't ignore the requirements of WP:CWW - that is policy, not suggestions. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:26, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * See also WP:PLAGIARISM. Providing the required attribution is trivial - your insistent refusal to do so is troubling. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:30, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Use of edit summaries
I noticed that you don't use edit summaries. While this is not generally required it is a courteous way to help other editors understand the reason behind your edits. It is required by policy, however, when you copy content from one article to another as explained in Copying within Wikipedia. Most experienced editors habitually use edit summaries. If you ever intent to become an administrator consistent use of edit summaries is one of the things looked for as part of the evaluation process. --Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:21, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * One more attempt here. You MUST use edit summaries for some things. One is when you make major changes to an article such as removal of massive amounts of content. Tell the rest of us why and what you are doing. The other is when you copy content from one article into another you MUST say where the content came from in the edit summary when you add the content. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:48, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

= October 2013 =

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=575369550 your edit] to List of programs broadcast by Disney Channel may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:09, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * *Get'cha Head in the Game 2007 – present

= November 2013 = Welcome to Wikipedia. I have noticed that some of your recent genre changes, such as the one you made to List of Mr. Young episodes ‎, have conflicted with our neutral point of view and verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend you to seek consensus for certain edits by discussing the matter on the article's talk page. Thank you. ''Please add a reference for the upcoming episodes. Right now I see that there are no upcoming episodes. Also If there are more upcoming episodes, they are part of season 3 not season 4. If you do find a source please add it to season 3 and don't add into season 4. '' WP Editor 2012 (talk) 13:07, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Please refrain from changing genres, as you did to List of Mr. Young episodes, without providing a source and without establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Thank you. ''Please provide sources for production codes and upcoming episodes. Also Trivia is not allowed. That's why I removed it. Please talk about the changes first. All this is WP:OR Also if you keep doing this you could be blocked. '' WP Editor 2012 (talk) 13:59, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at List of Mr. Young episodes, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ''Also adding content without WP:RS. Also starting an edit war. '' WP Editor 2012 (talk) 16:30, 5 November 2013 (UTC) Stop reverting the edits. They were taken out for a reason. If you disagree please talk about it on the article talk page. Next time this is reverted you will be reported.everythin g you add must be verifiable. WP Editor 2012 (talk) 16:32, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

= November 2014 =

Blocked
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for checkuser confirmed abuse of multiple accounts. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 16:48, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for continued socking/block evasion. You are obviously editing while logged-out in order to continue your disruptive edits at Talk:Phineas and Ferb (season 4). Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 18:42, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 * What do you mean "obvious logging out to continue disruption"? I haven't made any edits. user HH (talk) 22:18, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

November 2014
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on List of Phineas and Ferb episodes, Phineas and Ferb (season 1), Phineas and Ferb (season 2), Phineas and Ferb (season 3) and Phineas and Ferb (season 4). Edit war? I was just reverting to a stable version. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. I was reverting disruptive edits and obviously unapproved, sudden, and major changes to the article.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: I was simply reverting to a stable version after consistent vandalism by Dcbanners making major changes to the article without consensus. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. While we are discussing the article will remain stable unless a consensus to change is reached. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.  Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 06:08, 20 November 2014 (UTC) I don't think you can get blocked for reverting unapproved, sudden, and major changes to an article. user HH (talk) 02:52, 22 December 2014 (UTC) some time with the articles stable for the past week until you made the arbitrary decision to revert. They were not stable and the decision was certainly not arbitrary When discussion is underway on the talk page the content shouldn't be changed until consensus is achieved. Exactly why I reverted. After your reversions, other editors joined the discussion, all supporting Dcbanner's changes, so your reason for reverting was clearly not as strong as you thought it was. This intimidated the users who wanted them paired That being the case, when Dcbanners restored the content, you should not have reverted again. Yes I should have it was undoing vandalism To do so is the very essence of edit-warring. That sort of disruptive editing cannot be supported. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 07:17, 20 November 2014 (UTC) Why are you telling me that Dcbanners may be blocked. user HH (talk) 03:04, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
 * The discussion at Talk:Phineas and Ferb (season 4) has been underway for

Unblock

 * Why was I blocked? user HH (talk) 01:14, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm back and I noticed a user left a comment on my talk page saying that I " persisted in engaging in sockpuppetry after your block" even though I have stopped using sockpuppetry. This comment has been removed. The block evasion comment was a mistake. I was reblocked because my original block was too short. user HH (talk) 00:02, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Another comment about block evasion was on Talk:Phineas and Ferb (season 4) saying "Because user Hits hits keeps resorting to sockpuppetry and block evasion, all subsequent comments by his socks have been stricken out." I request that this comment be removed. user HH (talk) 00:10, 12 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'm confused. Did you sock or not?  You're asking us to remove comments about your socking saying they're not true, but here you are saying in your unblock that you recognize you were blocked for socking and won't sock again.  So, did you sock or not?  If so, what accounts did you use to make sock edits?  only (talk) 01:56, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I socked with user:WikiEditor2016 and user:Chasbo123 but I didn't evade my block. user HH (talk) 02:15, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I looked it up and I guess that this was a WP:Meatpuppet. I told someone about it and why they should be paired user HH (talk) 03:14, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

.

Disambiguation link notification for January 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Liv and Maddie, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Sweet 16 and Anne Winters. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

ANI
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:03, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * You really should respond at ANI, as people who don't respond almost always wind up blocked. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:18, 5 January 2015 (UTC)