User talk:Deezbuttz

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Deezbuttz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Betty Logan (talk) 20:21, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of best-selling singles[edit]

Read HERE. Just stop with your edits. Bluesatellite (talk) 01:16, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Titanic (1997 film)[edit]

Hello, I'm Betty Logan. I noticed that you recently removed content from Titanic (1997 film) without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Betty Logan (talk) 20:22, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Titanic (1997 film), 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. Betty Logan (talk) 23:06, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have removed sourced content and altered the billing several times down at Titanic (1997 film) and have failed to provide a rationale in the edit summary on every occasion. There is a discussion at Talk:Titanic_(1997_film)#Recent_edit in relation to your edits and I suggest you join the discussion and provide the community with an explanation for your edits. Please note that WP:Communication is required on Wikipedia, and you cannot opt out of that obligation. Betty Logan (talk) 22:29, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright[edit]

Hello Deezbuttz, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to List of highest-grossing films have been removed, as they appear to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Betty Logan (talk) 19:55, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018[edit]

Hello, I'm Betty Logan. I noticed that you made a change to an article, List of films considered the best, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Betty Logan (talk) 20:41, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at List of films considered the best, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Betty Logan (talk) 22:13, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

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, and seek consensus with them. 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.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Titanic (1997 film), you may be blocked from editing. General Ization ^Talk 20:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at List of best-selling video games. General Ization ^Talk 20:59, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at List of films considered the worst shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:45, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted images[edit]

Please do not add non-free images to articles as you did with this edit at List of best-selling video games and in this edit at List of films considered the worst without first making sure they comply with WP:NFCCP. It is extremely unlikely that a list entry qualifies under fair use, but if it does then a fair-use rational must be provided to meet the copyright requirements. Betty Logan (talk) 21:32, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of films considered the best[edit]

You have added Singin' in the Rain to List of films considered the best several times now, such as on March 2, March 4, March 6, and March 23, all sourced to the AFI's Greatest Movie Musicals. As has explained to you by several editors such as Mjf345, myself and TompaDompa the scope of the AFI lists are not sufficient for inclusion because they only consider American films. The inclusion criteria at Talk:List of films considered the best instructs "Don't add movies that are only "the best" if both country and genre are specified." This is because if you have genre picks for each country then the list would become indiscriminate. If you disagree with the criteria by all means start a discussion on the talk page, but currently it appears you are conducting a slow-burn edit war. I have asked you on a previous occasion to discuss your edits; the WP:BRD cycle requires you to discuss your edits if you are going to revert an editor, so please do not restore the film to the list without first seeking a consensus for your edit on the article talk page. Betty Logan (talk) 20:22, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018[edit]

Hello, I'm Betty Logan. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to List of box office bombs have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. Betty Logan (talk) 20:05, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to List of box office bombs, 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. Betty Logan (talk) 18:20, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Super Mario Bros. (film), you may be blocked from editing. Please do not label films as a "box office bomb" based on your own personal analysis. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:08, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Emoji Movie[edit]

You need to find a source where The Emoji Movie is considered the worst. (I really don't any new movies considered the worst after 2014.) By the way, I found the source! https://variety.com/2018/film/news/razzie-awards-worst-movie-emoji-movie-1202716607/

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Deezbuttz. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Deezbuttz. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Lord of the Rings (film series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Epic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2019[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at My Humps. SummerPhD^v2.0 22:33, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at We Built This City. 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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:30, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ouch BubbleGuppiesIsTheBest (talk) 12:08, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notification: Blocked[edit]

You have been blocked for 72 hours from editing for Vandalism. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Mojo Hand (talk) 03:52, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 2019[edit]

Hello, I'm Doctorx0079. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Friends have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. Doctorx0079 (talk) 01:28, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Betty Logan. I noticed that you recently removed content from List of highest-grossing films without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Betty Logan (talk) 17:06, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent disruptive edits. Your edits are a mix of unsourced changes and outright disruption and this talk page is evidence of long-term disruption. If you would like to be unblocked you will need to post a WP:GAB-compliant appeal that explains how you will edit in a manner that benefits the encyclopedia as opposed to editing according to your whims.

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 ~~~~}}. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:14, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]