User talk:Smoore95GAGA

October 2015
Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Revival (Selena Gomez album). Your edits have been reverted or removed. Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. — Tom (T2ME) 12:54, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
 * , it's really not productive to slap this template on a user talk page because of a content dispute. Both of you should be engaging in discussion. --Neil N  talk to me 13:30, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * How do you think it's productive to discuss with a person who acts like this (points down)? — Tom (T2ME) 15:46, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

TOMICA SHUT THE FUCK UP AND GO ANNOY THE FUCK OUT OF SOMEONE ELSE. I'M NOT DOING THIS TO BE PRODUCTIVE, I'M DOING THIS BECAUSE I'M FUCKING PISSED, BUT MORE THAN THAT I WANT MY ACCOUNT SHUT DOWN BECAUSE OF PEOPLE LIKE YOU. PEOPLE WHO ARE SO HELL BENT ON SHOVING THEIR PERSONAL OPINIONS DOWN PEOPLE'S THROATS. AND I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE WHO'S NOTICED. SOMEONE ELSE WAS AFRAID THAT LIVELIKEMUSIC WOULD BLOCK THEM FOR DISAGREEING WITH THEIR OPINION. I DON"T WANT TO BE INVOLVED WITH OTHER PEOPLE WHO THINK THEIR OPINIONS ARE FACTS, BECAUSE THEY'RE FUCKING NOT!!!!! Smoore95GAGA (talk) 15:50, 20 October 2015 (UTC) You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for edit warring, as you did at Revival (Selena Gomez album).  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 first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: . 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. Neil N  talk to me 15:36, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Just three days ago you had this note from. --Neil N  talk to me 15:39, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

FUCK YOU ALL. PLEASE SHUT MY ACCOUNT DOWN. I AM DONE DEALING WITH YOU BITCHES. I CONTACTED Smoore95GAGA (talk) 15:44, 20 October 2015 (UTC)


 * You can "shut your account down" by blanking the page and stopping editing. Alternatively, you can realize that revert, revert, revert is not going to get you anywhere and patience and discussion is required and come back in a month. --Neil N  talk to me 15:56, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

No, I want my account SHUT DOWN. Do you understand what that means? That doesn't mean "it's still active but I don't use it." That means it DOES NOT EXIST. I'm not going to wait a whole fucking month to get my account back just to get it blocked again for EVEN LONGER THAN A MONTH within days. Because that always happens with you guys. Within days after I get unblocked, you block me again. Maybe you should think to yourselves at some point "Hey, maybe we have huge stick up our asses and maybe we should take them out and realize that this user is actually right." Because I am right. I am getting blocked for adding something to a page that has been added to EVERY OTHER ALBUM PAGE. That would be like blocking a person for adding a reference to a page. Do you realize how fucking stupid you are?? Smoore95GAGA (talk) 17:03, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * It is not technically possible to delete accounts. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 17:29, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Oh, and another thing, I know that you guys aren't blocking me for the good of Wikipedia, because if you were, you would block Tomica and Dan56 as well, because they are also edit-warring. If me changing their edits is edit-warring, then how is them doing the same thing to me not? You guys are fucking hypocrites, blocking someone for a reason that you won't block someone else for. WHY DON'T YOU BE NEUTRAL FOR A CHANGE?!?!?!? You claim to be "administrators," but administrators would not take sides. If I were an administrator and I saw that two people were breaking rules, I wouldn't say "Oh, well I don't like the one but I like the other, so therefore I will block the one I don't like." Who the fuck put you in charge?! That's fucked up. Especially since I tried to talk to you about this and they didn't. In case you;re too fucking stupid to know this, I AM AWARE THAT EVERYONE ON WIKIPEDIA HAS SOMETHING AGAINST ME FOR SOME REASON! How else would you explain the fact that I am being blocked for edit-warring, yet two other people who have edit-warred aren't. Seriously, go fuck yourself. Smoore95GAGA (talk) 17:15, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

And really? Patience and discussion is required? That's rich coming from you, considering I MESSAGED YOU TELLING YOU THAT I WASN'T SURE WHAT TO DO AND YOU SAID NOTHING IN RETURN. I love how you're like, "Oh, you should've came and talked to me," but then when I do, you say nothing. Stop acting like you're trying to help me, you're just trying to block me for a super long time. I love how everyone thinks you help people. If you truly wanted to help me, you would've said something. I mean, really, why did you say nothing when I messaged you saying that I wasn't sure what to do? I have been told that when I'm not sure what to do (since I'm new here) to message an administrator. And I know that you saw my message, because someone else messaged you after me and you responded to them. So for some reason, you chose not to respond to me. Why? Smoore95GAGA (talk) 17:24, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * See WP:NOTTHEM. Just three days ago you were unblocked on the condition you wouldn't edit war any more. You were blocked today because you clearly broke that condition. And I did post a note to your talk page for Tomica. You should have stopped reverting then. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 17:29, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Ok, just answer me this: both Tomica and I have changed each other's edits the same number of times. So if me doing that is considered edit-warring, how is it not considered that for them? Unless you give a valid reason for why you blocked me and not them, I will be forced to believe that you are very biased here, and only blocked me simply because you do not like me. And if that's the case, you can bet your sorry ass I will report you to another administrator when I get unblocked. I will also wreak havoc on Wikipedia when I get unblocked. Make your choice right now: either delete my account, or suffer the consequences when I get unblocked. Smoore95GAGA (talk) 17:34, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Tomica had two reverts today, you had three, after you were told any more edit warring would result in a lengthy block. You know how to request an unblock, I'm done here. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 17:42, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I have however changed your block to indefinite in light of your threats to disrupt. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 17:44, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

<div class="user-block" style="background:#ffe0e0; border:1px solid #886644; padding:0.5em; margin:0.5em auto; min-height: 40px"> Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. ([ block log] • [ active blocks] • [ global blocks] • [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/autoblock/?user=&project=en.wikipedia.org autoblocks] • contribs • deleted contribs • [ abuse filter log] • [ • change block settings • [ unblock] • [ checkuser] ([ log]))

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If you have already appealed to the Unblock Ticket Request System and been declined you may appeal to the Arbitration Committee's Ban Appeals Subcommittee. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 23:18, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Justin bieber purpose


A tag has been placed on Justin bieber purpose requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either
 * disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
 * disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 23:07, 15 November 2015 (UTC)