User talk:Adamtimberlake

Adamtimberlake, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi Adamtimberlake! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Rosiestep (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

I don't know what you're talking about[edit]

But that IMDB page you linked is fake. You're making a false account. This "Meg Michaels" you speak of, doesn't exist. I checked everything and it's not real. YOU ARE making this up. I'm sorry, but I know fake when I see it. BigGreener (talk) 04:58, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE STOP SPAMMING. Everything you said were forged. Go get some help, you're easily gonna give me an aneurysm. BigGreener (talk) 06:11, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The last straw[edit]

THAT IS IT. I had enough of your stupid edits. YOU MADE THOSE UP, YOU ASK SOMEONE TO POSE FOR THIS SO-CALLED IMAGINARY FRIEND OF YOURS CALLED "MEG MICHAELS", AND ABOVE ALL, YOU DON'T HAVE THE PROPER USE OF VERIFICATION. YOU MY FRIEND ARE A STALKER, AND STALKERS LIKE YOU SHOULD BE BANNED FOR LIFE ON. THIS. SITE. I tried to be nice, I tried to be cool, but you, oh-ho YOU. Become the straw that broke the camel's back. And funny you mentioned being reported, cause I did reported to you before you came back. Please do not reply back or else you get a referral for your actions.

Never do this again. BigGreener (talk) 06:20, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Glove is off.[edit]

You're harassing me as a fellow user, and you're framing me for what I am doing. That is not right. BigGreener (talk) 06:37, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ian.thomson (talk) 06:40, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a place for managers to promote someone's career.

Harassment is not acceptable.

All information must be verifiable with professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources -- not IMDB pages that anyone can edit. Ian.thomson (talk) 06:40, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock[edit]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Adamtimberlake (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The user BigGreener is trolling and ignoring verification and verified sources. Links have been provided (that are not verified) such as IMDb, but additional links have been provided to other sites: her social: https://www.instagram.com/itsmegnotmegan/; link to her Famous Birthdays before the name change: https://www.famousbirthdays.com/people/meg-jones.html; link to her Shorty Awards nomination page: http://shortyawards.com/6th/itsmegnotmegan; link to a focus op-ed in Teens Wanna Know: http://teenswannaknow.com/meg-v-jones-and-notastatistic/, and many more. Her name was changed to Meg Michaels as a stage name from Jones due to SAG purposes, as SAG cannot have the same name as another member. This man is spamming and ignoring articles, social media accounts, awards, news, and verified and is negatively impacting the community. Further links and contacts to managers can be provided. The problem is BigGreener is saying this person does not exist, and is pushing to have me blocked for providing verified information. This is not what was expected from the Wikipedia community, and I am not harassing this person. This person has actively gone through anything I've done and spam deleted it, along with pushing to get me reported and blocked. I am not harassing, I am asking him to contact verified sources - Shorty Awards, Famous Birthdays, Teens Wanna Know, and more, and he is yelling online that they are made up websites? Adamtimberlake (talk) 06:43, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your request largely deals with what someone else did, instead of what you did and the reason you were blocked. Whether they behaved badly or not, you were blocked for things you did. Please address that in another unblock request should you choose to make one. Assuming you are correct and Meg Michaels exists and/or has done what you claim, please read WP:PROMO, WP:COI, and WP:PAID. I am declining this request. 331dot (talk) 07:58, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Try addressing the reasons I gave for blocking you, instead of ones that really don't have anything to do with what I said. Ian.thomson (talk) 06:50, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock[edit]

I listed one source that is not verifiable, IMDb. What is not verifiable about mainstream news articles from The Shorty Awards, Teens Wanna Know, and other sources such as Famous Birthdays? What information are you looking to be provided outside of the photos of her at panels at NYCC talking about the voice actor roles. This is verified information, I am able to provide to you whatever you need - I'm asking what is wrong with the other links that have been provided. Do you need SAG pay stubs? Videos of her on sets? You're not providing answers as an admin. No one is promoting her, but is providing information into the encyclopedia that is real and verifiable. Adamtimberlake (talk) 06:50, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, those sites don't say anything about an acting career. There's a difference between proving a person exists and proving that they've done something. Also, that really doesn't fully address the reasons I gave for blocking you. Ian.thomson (talk) 07:03, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've unformatted the above comment, as only one open request is needed at a time. 331dot (talk) 07:49, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Meg Michaels (September 21)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AngusWOOF was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Does not meet WP:ENT, no significant roles in major productions. Poor sourcing (famous birthdays, IMDb), and not mentioned in the Business Insider article. That leaves just some random non-notable blogger who interviewed her.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Meg Michaels and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Meg Michaels, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:46, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Meg Michaels[edit]

Hello, Adamtimberlake. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Meg Michaels".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Dolotta (talk) 04:00, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]