User talk:Cicifan247

United World Chart[edit]

Please do not add the United World Chart, or any other chart listed at WP:BADCHARTS, to any Wikipedia article.—Kww(talk) 14:12, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Rihanna appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. JForget 00:22, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Hotness (album)[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Hotness (album), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hotness (album). Thank you. Amalthea 13:28, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2009 Rihanna album[edit]

Hi
I know that Rihanna said in an interview last year that she will release her next album "definitely 2009". Note that this is already in the article, in the Rihanna#2008-present section, with a link to the interview. I'm absolutely fine with having it there. However, her discography should only list the albums and singles that were either already released or are officially announced with a pretty precise release date. Rihanna's expectation isn't enough, musicians say these things all the time, and quite often it turns out differently then they initially planned. So, until we have a reliable source saying flat out "the next Rihanna album will be released April 2009" or something we mustn't list it in the discography, otherwise we violate WP:VERIFIABILITY and just take part in spreading rumors. Are you OK with that?
Amalthea 21:32, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take that as a yes. --Amalthea 11:41, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced material[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Capricorn (astrology), is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. --Nathanael Bar-Aur L. (talk) 02:24, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Ciara has been reverted, as it introduced negative or controversial biographical material without providing a reliable source for this information. Wikipedia requires that all such material be sourced to address the issue of libel. Thank you. Martin451 (talk) 03:33, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Animal love[edit]

The article Animal love has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Dictionary definition, Wikipedia is not a dictionary.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —Largo Plazo (talk) 02:45, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Animal love[edit]

I have nominated Animal love, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Animal love (3rd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. —Largo Plazo (talk) 02:50, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Flo Rida has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Ginsengbomb (talk) 06:06, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Pacific Division (hip hop group)[edit]

A tag has been placed on Pacific Division (hip hop group) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Stroppolo (talk) 00:29, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Pac div[edit]

A tag has been placed on Pac div requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Stroppolo (talk) 00:30, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Flo Rida, you will be blocked from editing. Favonian (talk) 09:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Hello Cicifan247! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 876 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Kai Crawford - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2010[edit]

Welcome, and thank you for your attempt to lighten up Wikipedia. However, this is an encyclopedia and the articles are intended to be serious, so please don't make joke edits, as you did to Beyoncé Knowles. Readers looking for accurate information will not find them amusing. If you'd like to experiment with editing, try the sandbox, where you can write practically anything you want. Off2riorob (talk) 10:22, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contribution to Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It), but we are trying to write an encyclopedia here, so please keep your edits factual and neutral. Our readers are looking for serious articles and will not find joke edits amusing. Remember that Wikipedia is a widely-used reference tool, so we have to take what we do here seriously. If you'd like to experiment with editing, use the sandbox to get started. Thank you. Off2riorob (talk) 10:24, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add defamatory content, as you did to Ciara, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Off2riorob (talk) 10:25, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you add defamatory content, as you did to Britney Spears, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Off2riorob (talk) 10:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Off2riorob (talk) 10:31, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Materialscientist (talk) 10:36, 10 February 2010 (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).

Cicifan247 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Not a vandalism-only account. I will not vandalize again. I've contributed to important articles.

Decline reason:

If you wanted to stop vandalizing, you had ample opportunity to do so when you were warned to stop. Given your long history of vandalism, I can't find any evidence that unblocking you would be likely to make the encyclopedia better. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:20, 1 May 2010 (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).

Cicifan247 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I've been editing Wikipedia since January of 2009. I've contributed to the Outta Control article on November 8, 2009 and redirected GS Boys to GS Boyz

Decline reason:

I am declining your request for unblock because it does not address the reason for your block. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.

Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. James (T C) 22:40, 1 May 2010 (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.

I've restored the earlier request that you blanked from the talk page. As the template says, you aren't allowed to remove the earlier request if you're still requesting unblock. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:46, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Kai Crawford[edit]

The article Kai Crawford has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (biographies) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back. Thank you. This proposed deletion was started by User:Piotrus

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:48, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]