User talk:Rìgh

Album notability
Please see the album Notability guide. The albums you have added are not notable, but you can add reviews and any charting info or they might be deleted. --Jennica ✿ / talk 22:21, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Ernest Gellner into Philosophical Investigations. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g.,. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted copied template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:03, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Friendly notice, please read
Please do not personalize talk page discussions and remember to assume good faith. SPECIFICO talk  19:25, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

At the Stefan Molyneux article
—it is not necessary to say that someone is lying, as that is a personal attack. Bus stop (talk) 04:30, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Apparently this needs to be put more bluntly: calling other editors liars and typing in ALL CAPS with an angry tone like that will get you blocked if you keep it up. Please stop. Fyddlestix (talk) 04:55, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Dutch customs and etiquette
An earlier nomination for deletion resulted in keeping the article Dutch customs and etiquette. Obviously deletion isn't uncontroversial, so PROD wasn't the right step to take here, however bad the state of the article might be. – Editør (talk) 00:14, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

ANI Notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Fyddlestix (talk) 04:22, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Because of the evidence presented at ANI regarding your repeated personal attacks and civility violations at Talk:Stefan Molyneux, I have blocked your account for 24 hours. Please understand that making personal attacks toward other users is not acceptable on Wikipedia. It degrades the discussion and its focus towards resolving the issue-at hand, and it is in direct conflict with the creation of a positive discussion and editing environment for all users. You're expected as an editor of this project to discuss and collaborate positively with others and to refrain from uncivil behavior. Thank you.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   07:03, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Apparently 24 hours didn't get the point across, so I've blocked you for a period of one week. If you wish to appeal, see the guide to appealing blocks. Going forward, please restrict your comments to content, not your belief that other editors have some sort of "agenda". If you cannot come to agreement with other editors, use dispute resolution rather than shouting at them or speculating as to their motives. If you're willing to agree to do that going forward, say so here and I'll be willing to lift the block early, with the full understanding that it will be reinstated for its original period or longer if this should happen again. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:44, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * All you have to do is read the entire Talk page on that article and you will discover that higher level editors have insinuated things about me. Of course, it seems that insinuation is alright but outright saying something is not okay. I wonder why that is? People in power love to use euphemism in order to survive. I have not filed any block requests yet these individuals have, I wonder why that is. Could it be that I'm attempting to input information that they are worried about and have tried so virulently hard to reject? This is the second time they have attempted to silence me. The first time was entirely justified. The second time is NOT justified. Rìgh (talk) 22:40, 19 December 2017 (UTC)