User talk:Seelentau

Image copyright problem with File:Aknotof.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Aknotof.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 04:41, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Naruto chapter names
From the usual spoiler provider. Geg (talk) 18:47, 30 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry, lol. They're from ohana in the spoiler threads on 2ch. She doesn't always post the chapter titles so sometimes I have to wait for the raw to come out to look them up. Geg (talk) 21:52, 4 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Hmm, it's hard to give a specific link because of the way 2ch works. All threads are automatically deleted about a day after they reach 1000 posts, so I can't really give a concrete link to a specific thread. Here's the home page though: http://www.2ch.net/


 * As for the episode list, I think the Japanese wikipedia has slightly different rules about that. Future episodes are hidden until after they air, so the next episode is still there, it's just hidden. Geg (talk) 18:43, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

New Shippuden eps
The source is from here The image may go down in a few days or so though. Geg (talk) 23:25, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

why did you remove the series overview for naruto?
For death and glory (talk) 07:00, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

April 2019
Thanks for contributing to the article Outline in Color. However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. Please help by adding more sources to the article you edited, and/or by clarifying how the sources already given support the claims (see here for how to do inline referencing). If you need further help, you can look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia, or ask at the Teahouse, or just ask me. Thank you. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:20, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

August 2019
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Slipknot (band), without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.  Rob van  vee  16:23, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Isn't it policy on wikipedia to add onto articles instead of simply pressing the undo button? Besides, it's news to me that every little bit of information needs to be sourced. Else, whole articles would be full of holes, such as Slipknot's article. Seelentau (talk) 18:37, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * No, it isn't policy. Policy actually says "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material ie you! Unless there is some policy I've missed that says "add as much shit to Wikipedia, sourced or not because who cares about quality"!  Rob van  vee  19:06, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The funny thing is, you rollbacked a rollback I did of an edit that had no source. Also, I meant that a combined effort should be made to correct mistakes, instead of simply rollbacking them. Imagine if, instead of improving each other's mistakes, everyone would just rollback everything and never bother to actually correct things. That wouldn't be very efficient, would it? Seelentau (talk) 19:12, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually I wasn't interested in the image size change you made, I reverted (not rollbacked) your edit regarding the release of the 3rd single which was unsourced and which you have subsequently sourced. It should be noted that as far as I can see, the article in your Blabbermouth source was published on the day you claim the single was released but makes no mention of the single's release date. Just because the article was published on that day does not mean the single was released that day. Did you look at the date claimed on the albums page? I don't want to get into a dispute over something so trivial but I will say this; if you, like me want to see only articles of the highest quality on Wikipedia then you'll make every effort to make only edits of the highest quality as we strive for quality, not quantity.  Rob van  vee  19:26, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The single was released today, yes: https://twitter.com/slipknot/status/1158407852270034950. Only digitally, though. Seelentau (talk) 19:29, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Are you suggesting CoI
Are you suggesting that Ciaentertain is in conflict of interest? Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:27, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Most certainly. Ever since he joined Wikipedia in 2009, he only ever edited articles relating to Dave Chavarri and in 2019, he removed the lawsuit from the band's article multiple times already. Same for other compromising references. Seelentau (talk) 01:35, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Diamonds In The Rough digital reissue
I will admit that I was wrong, though I have no idea how in the world you and your friend got all this information so early before any official announcement. It also strikes me as odd that the band would remove said information from the comment only to re-announce it officially three days later. But I'll give credit where credit is due.

MetallicaMan800 (talk) 16:00, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I honestly don't know why they removed it, but here is proof of its existence. Coincidentally, my friend showed me on pic 1 that they only added the comment after he was the first (and then only one) to comment. So I sent him pic 2 to show him that I can't even see his comment and then commented myself on pic 3 to see if he could see my comment (which he couldn't). So that's why I know they removed that info. Looks like it was prematurely added. Seelentau (talk) 16:05, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Huh, that really is strange. Like I said, I'm sorry I doubted you. Can't wait for this reissue, though the new cover art is gonna take some getting used to lol


 * MetallicaMan800 (talk) 19:50, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

July 2020
Thanks for contributing to the article Outline in Color. However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. Please help by adding more sources to the article you edited, and/or by clarifying how the sources already given support the claims (see here for how to do inline referencing). If you need further help, you can look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia, or ask at the Teahouse, or just ask me. Thank you. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:43, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi
Hi Whould you mind "Miscellany for Deletion" of a page titled Alexander Muise, it got some disturbing stuff you want to look into that DOES NOT fit Wikipedia standards. --Alemui12 (talk) 23:26, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

March 2021
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove maintenance templates from Wikipedia articles without resolving the problem that the template refers to, as you did at Ill Niño. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:52, 8 March 2021 (UTC) As for the other one, it didn't show at the top of the article, so I thought it was a bug. Seelentau (talk) 18:15, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I either added a reference or removed the information if I wasn't able to find any source. That's why I removed the template. You added it again, so please tell me, where are references needed?

Disambiguation link notification for May 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Reflections (Minnesota band), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 王. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:02, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

August 2023
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Avenged Sevenfold, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. FMSky (talk) 21:25, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * The member/band info is on the respective members'/band's own wiki pages (see M. Shadows, The Rev and Suburban Legends). Why would it be wrong to also add this info to the A7X page? As for the demo info, it is sourced, so not sure why you reverted that? Seelentau (talk) 21:36, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * you changed early 1999 to october 1999 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Avenged_Sevenfold&diff=prev&oldid=1172242726 --FMSky (talk) 21:37, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, which is what the sources states. Did you check the source at all before reverting my edit? And what about the members and their bands? Should those be removed from the respective pages as well? :/ Seelentau (talk) 21:39, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * How is anyone supposed to know this if you change content in front of a source without any explanation --FMSky (talk) 21:50, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I didn't expect anyone to care, honestly^^ Will keep it in mind for next time, sorry! Seelentau (talk) 21:51, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Warning around edit warring
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bens dream (talk • contribs) 17:14, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

7 day block for edit warring
 You have been blocked from editing for a period of 7 days for edit warring. 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 review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. PhilKnight (talk) 17:29, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm not arguing to be unblocked, I'm aware that the block was justified. However, the user in question changed sourced information on the page to fit their personal views, which to my knowledge constitutes vandalism. I was simply undoing it because an editor's opinion doesn't outweigh sourced information. That's why I'm asking for the page to be returned to its original, pre-vandalism version:. Seelentau (talk) 18:17, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * While blocked, you only have access to this page to request to be unblocked. You'll have to either get unblocked or wait for the block to expire first. 331dot (talk) 18:45, 30 April 2024 (UTC)