User talk:Julie Passas

February 2020
Please do not remove information from articles. Wikipedia is not censored, and content is not removed on the sole grounds of perceived offensiveness. Please discuss this issue on the article's talk page to reach consensus rather than continuing to remove the disputed material. If the content in question involves images, you also have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide the images that you may find offensive. Thank you. LibStar (talk) 22:58, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Nick Adams (commentator), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. NawlinWiki (talk) 23:05, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. JarrahTree 23:11, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Highbury. Your defamatory comments will be challenged soon. The text is being deleted as it is unsourced and defamatory. Stop challenging my deletion.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 14:46, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

ANI notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 15:14, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Blocked
I don't know what I was blocked for. I removed defamatory and unsourced staements coming from Australia and Australians who wish to defame and cause trouble with issues that have no relevance today. Please unblock and review the content and sources as they are not really applicable and are not relevant.Julie Passas (talk) 17:40, 11 February 2020 (UTC)


 * You were blocked for edit warring which is repeatedly committing the same action over and over against the objections of other editors. Instead of edit warring, you need to go to the article talk page, and explain why you want to make the changes you are, and build consensus to enact those changes.  It is clear other people disagree with your assessment.  Your job is not to simply re-do your desired changes, rather your job is to convince people why you are correct.  If you can indicate that you will NOT blank large sections of the article again, and will instead build consensus on the article talk page, and first get people to agree with you that your changes are necessary, THEN you can be unblocked.  -- Jayron 32 19:32, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring, as you did at Nick Adams (commentator). Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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 think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. -- Jayron 32 15:22, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

May 2020
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to censor or remove encyclopedic content based on the fact that it is offensive to some readers, you may be blocked from editing. Wikipedia is not censored, and attempts to censor encyclopedic content will be regarded as vandalism. LibStar (talk) 00:51, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Potential conflict of interest
Hello, Julie Passas. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Nick Adams (commentator), you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Conflict of interest);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. LibStar (talk) 00:57, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Blocked
Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Nick Adams (commentator)—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 09:26, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

June 2020
Hello, I'm Érico. I noticed that in this edit to Nick Adams (commentator), you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Érico  (talk)  13:34, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Nick Adams (commentator), you may be blocked from editing. LibStar (talk) 00:35, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Nick Adams (commentator). Jusdafax (talk) 01:23, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --LibStar (talk) 01:34, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Indefinite partial block from Nick Adams (commentator)
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain areas of the encyclopedia for Disruptive editing, competence, and communication issues. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. El_C 01:41, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Looks, Julie, this is how it works on Wikipedia. When you remove +6,000 bytes of content from an article, you are expected to explain that removal on the article talk page. And not just with a general proclamation, but with a detailed account of the reason behind why each component was removed, specifically. If you're unwilling or unable to come to terms with this necessary accountability, then I'm afraid you cannot be deemed competent enough to edit on Wikipedia. The currently blank article talk page is still available for you to contribute to. You can still attempt to gain consensus for your desired changes there. If you do the work, that is. If your article talk page contributions are deemed serious and substantive, an unblock from the article itself may also be considered. But a fair bit of effort is still needed before you reach that point, so please take note. El_C 02:13, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Oh, there's also your conflict of interests disclosure. That, too, will have to be attended to prior to an unblock. El_C 02:26, 29 June 2020 (UTC)