User talk:Catty319

June 2015[edit]

How do you semi-protect pages? Catty319 (talk) 18:01, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Catty319. Only administrators can semi-protect pages. However, if you find a page that you feel needs protection, you can request that it be protected here. Also, below here I'm going to leave you a welcome message with some useful links. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 18:04, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia![edit]

Hello, Catty319. Welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions. My name is Howicus, and I've been an editor here for some time. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

If you're working on creating a new article, you should take a look at this page on your first article. Also, this page has instructions on how to cite sources, complete with videos.

If all this Wikicode is a little overwhelming, this cheatsheet may help untangle it.

If you're looking for a tutorial of sorts, The Wikipedia Adventure is a good option.

And if you need more help, I'd recommend getting live help at the Wikipedia help chat channel: click here to join. Additionally, you could ask me on my talk page, try the Teahouse (a help page for new users) or click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. Again, welcome, and have fun editing! Howicus (Did I mess up?) 18:04, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015[edit]

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to List of Girl Meets World episodes. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. MPFitz1968 (talk) 23:11, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I found sources that say that the viewership data in Girl Meets World is wrong. I'm not sure if I should edit it.Catty319 (talk) 16:29, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Catty319, you need to discuss these changes at Talk:List of Girl Meets World episodes. Reverting without discussing this first is considered "bad form" on Wikipedia (please read WP:BRD). You have made a "change" which has now been challenged (twice, by two different editors), so you should not have reverted again without discussing this on the Talk page first. Please do so now. Please also review WP:3RR, because if you continue to revert like you have been, you could get in trouble for what is known as Edit warring. ----IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:02, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

More June 2015[edit]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to List of Girl Meets World episodes. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Amaury (talk) 16:59, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at List of Girl Meets World episodes. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

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.

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. MPFitz1968 (talk) 17:00, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2015[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at List of Girl Meets World episodes. You know that the info you added is wrong yet persist in adding it. Looks to be deliberate falsification of info now. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:29, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would NEVER intestinally disrupt Wikipedia. I KNOW that the info I added is true, and it is NOT false. Catty319 (talk) 20:17, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All the info you have added is false and the references you are using for support are bogus and say nothing about what you are adding. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:31, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation[edit]

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jt029350, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:22, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Catty319 reported by User:MPFitz1968 (Result: ). Thank you. MPFitz1968 (talk) 14:22, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at List of Girl Meets World episodes[edit]

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. 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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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.

The full report is at WP:AN3#User:Catty319 reported by User:MPFitz1968 (Result: Blocked), Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 15:37, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Catty319 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My edits to Wikipedia were in fact not to hurt but to improve it. I am sorry for any disruption I caused and if you unblock me, I pledge to make all useful contributions. Please except this sincere apology to all of the Wikipedia community. Catty319 (talk) 20:18, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have not addressed any of the reasons for this block, including the sockpuppetry and the use of bogus references. Huon (talk) 16:03, 20 June 2015 (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.

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).

Catty319 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I added info with sources that I believed were reliable. I did not intentionally edit war, I was only trying to get a clear reason on what was wrong with my source, and I did not intend to cause so much disruption. If you except my sincere apology and unblock me, I promise to make only useful contributions, and will back up my info with valid sources and listen to my fellow Wikipeida editors. Also, I am NOT a sock puppet. I would never abuse multiple accounts just to vandalize. I apologize to all the Wikipedia community. Catty319 (talk) 23:06, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Again, you still have not address many of the reasons for this block. According to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jt029350, this has been part of a scheme of conduct since January. Are you denying that those were all your accounts or arguing that you had a good basis to do all that anyways? Once you've acknowledged that those were all your accounts, then you can begin to discuss what's wrong with the months of antics to add in the information including using various accounts and if so, why does your claim that you suddenly had no idea why the references were questionable lack credibility. Ricky81682 (talk) 08:59, 30 June 2015 (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.

Please respond to my unblock request as soon as possible on my talk page.