User talk:Theboo77

February 2018
Hello, I'm CASSIOPEIA. I noticed that you made a change to an article, People's Alliance of New Brunswick, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 13:16, 27 February 2018 (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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pipicacalol69 (talk • contribs) 14:50, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at People's Alliance of New Brunswick. 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:. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  16:30, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Pipicacalol69 (talk) 14:03, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Unblock
My apologies, I was not ignoring the talk function I just never knew it existed. I do not work for the party, only asked if I could update history as it hasnt for awhile. I do not intend to promote the party, only add additional history as the last piece of history was back in 2014. Four years have passed, many things change. The leader has been holding town halls the past 3 years, which is a part of history. Ive added links to the edits I have made, which were requested. I will add what conflict of interest if necessary, however I am not a member of said party or work for them in any other way. Theboo77 (talk) 14:38, 28 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Since you have said that you are editing the page at the party's request, you are effectively representing them since they are directing you on what edits to make. I strongly advise you to restrict your contributions to the talk page, and as well place the UserboxCOI template on your userpage (User:Theboo77).


 * Also note that the party has no right of ownership or editorial control over the article. Wikipedia is uninterested in what the party wants to say about itself or how it wishes to be portrayed. Only previously published information from reliable sources that are independent of the subject will be considered valid. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:07, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

They party did not tell me what to write. I had a friend of mine mention the wikipedia page history has not had anything from the last 3 years as much had happened. I added three things, with links. I guess they will have to hope someone updates their recent history for them.

March 2018
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to People's Alliance of New Brunswick, 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.  Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 14:07, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The content that you removed had 8 citations, so the claim in your edit summary does not seem justified. Given your recent block, I suggest you be very careful when editing this article. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 14:09, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. A slithy tove (talk) 18:07, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. A slithy tove (talk) 19:52, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

September 2018
Please be aware that there are politcal rivals editing the peoples alliance of new brunswick wikipage. I only wish to edit the page to keep it factual and on topic of the party. Upon reading and editing other political parties, I have noticed that any type of negative history or controversies is absent. Which is fair. However, editing to add any type of negative things possible continue to happen over and over again to this one particular party which seems to be allowed by one user in particular who is in conflict of interest as they are a known supporter of a rival political party (there are 6 in New Brunswick). Wiki should be a neutral site to read on specifics. If wiki begins to allow rivals to go onto other parties pages and add negative stuff, or allow that, it would really weaken the content. I could go to all 5 other party pages and add every controversy each party has ever faced but how would that make wiki better? Furthermore, it is evident changes are being made to weaken this partys public position, for example, when I add updates polling and add the link as a citation, this user deletes it and adds an earlier poll with a lesser percentage. This clearly shows the user is in a conflict of interest. Can this editing war started by this user please stop? Or if not, then please allow me to update all parties with their contraversial information for which I will add legit links.

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Kendall-K1 (talk) 03:20, 9 September 2018 (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 People's Alliance of New Brunswick, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you.

Hello, I'm T. Eliot de Gagne. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to People's Alliance of New Brunswick have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.

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. A slithy tove (talk) 11:08, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Outing of other editors' personal information
Do not add personal information about other contributors to Wikipedia, as you did at People's Alliance of New Brunswick. Wikipedia operates on the principle that every contributor has the right to remain completely anonymous. Posting personal information about a user is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's harassment policy. Wikipedia policy on this issue is strictly enforced and your edits have been reverted and/or suppressed, not least because such information can appear on web searches. Wikipedia's privacy policy is to protect the privacy of every user, including you. Persistently adding personal information about other contributors may result in you being blocked from editing.

Specifically, you have done this twice within edit summaries you've added with your edits to the People's Alliance of New Brunswick article. Both times, you used information from outside of Wikipedia such as personal websites and social media outlets - information that has not been disclosed on Wikipedia by the users involved - to try and expose their real-life identities or their real-life affiliations or information. '''This behavior is unacceptable and cannot occur again. This is the final and only warning that you will receive regarding the breach of privacy of other editors. If this occurs again, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia and without any further notice.' If you have concerns regarding the violation of Wikipedia policies by other editors or users and if the evidence you have in order to assert these violations involve any'' "Off-Wiki information" such as websites, social media outlets, or locations not disclosed by the users involved, you need to contact the Arbitration Committee privately. Do not share any such information on Wikipedia, where the information is public and can be accessed and read by anyone. This is a severe violation of policy, and any further attempts to do so will result in an indefinite block where you will be required to discuss and appeal it before you'll be allowed to resume editing. Thank you for understanding the severity of this issue and for your cooperation. Best regards -  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)  02:06, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

September 2018
Hello, I'm Kendall-K1. I noticed that you made a comment that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Kendall-K1 (talk) 02:08, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Kendall-K1 - What revision or diff is this warning you just left pertaining to exactly? Can you please link me to the diff?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   02:21, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I was thinking of these two edit summaries. I thought there were others, but maybe they were in the redacted versions.  Kendall-K1 (talk) 02:36, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Edit warring at People's Alliance of New Brunswick
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours 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 read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 02:25, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Kris Austin leader of PANB.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:Kris Austin leader of PANB.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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 deleted 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. Whpq (talk) 23:02, 28 September 2018 (UTC)