User talk:TommyD2019

January 2019
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Thomas Dellert Dellacroix has been reverted. Your edit here to Thomas Dellert Dellacroix was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSb3CDkwIWI, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST2iKB3_jAc, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XUK2WCRQfM, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ3CgIMilRc, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocyjaLlob1k, https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Thomas+Dellert+Tommy+Dollar+, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8zU_v8RXQI) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. music or video) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline. If the information you linked to is indeed in violation of copyright, then such information should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file, or consider linking to the original. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 06:19, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Mahveotm. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Thomas Dellert Dellacroix, 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. Mahveotm (talk) 23:18, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
 * @Mahveotm: It's hard to find good faith in the continuing, repeated addition of large chunks of text without sources, despite your kind message here to this user (who appears to be the subject person himself). Heading for a block? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:19, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * If the subject thinks the article on him is not accurate, let's guide him to the talk page so we can discuss it, not threaten a block. Jonathunder (talk) 01:01, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Let's first try to confirm that the user in fact is the subject himself. Then let's look at his activity/contributions (not much to peruse) & see that he already once and then twice has been guided there but ignored it. Then let's have a look at page history and see how the user repeatedly has ignored sourcing requirements & continued to add bulks of unsourced stuff. Then, if still called for, let's reprimand poor old Serge. There's a couple-3-4 good "Let's" för ya. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:27, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Reply
I replied to your question on my talk page. You can ask me further questions either there or here. Jonathunder (talk) 00:47, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Thomas Dellert
Please do not make disruptive edits like the one you just made here to Thomas Dellert. Edits like these will be interpreted by other editors as being malicious and purposefully disruptive. If you need help or have concerns, you can discuss them on the article's talk page. You're also welcome to message me with your questions and I'll be happy to help you - just don't make edits like this. They will not benefit anybody and will only make things harder on you, not easier. Thanks :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:07, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

January 2019
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 36 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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:.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:20, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You were clearly warned above that the edit you made to the article was not okay and that it was disruptive. For continuing to make these disruptive edits to the article despite being clearly asked to stop, your account has been temporarily blocked in order to prevent further disruption. Sorry, man... I tried asking you to stop, but this is clearly what's needed in order to maintain a positive editing environment and process there. :-/  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:24, 16 January 2019 (UTC)