User talk:Imcool246

Here's wishing you a welcome to Wikipedia, Imcool246. Thank you for your contributions. Here are some useful links, which have information to help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Jytdog (talk) 06:33, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:VERIFY is policy[edit]

Hello, I'm Jytdog. I noticed that you made a change to an article, 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. Jytdog (talk) 06:33, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

hi i have proof

http://nsw.swimming.org.au/visageimages/2015%20MC%20Champs%20Results%20By%20Event.pdf

it has S8 on pg12 of it

CPSARA = Cerebral Palsy Sporting & Recreation Association

I have added the S8 based on that ref. You need to come to the article Talk page Talk:Amanda Reid and talk. And you need to stop SOCKING. Jytdog (talk) 07:10, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

im happy to give you her email

Read WP:RS. An email has no value. You are not even trying to understand Wikipedia. Jytdog (talk) 07:45, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

facebook link to her team page

Read WP:RS. Really. Read it. Jytdog (talk) 07:48, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Again, what if what you wanted to add something terrible to the article like "Amanda was arrested for killing someone" to the article? I would be reverting exactly the same way. Your edits are wrong for exactly the same reason. You cannot add unsourced content to a Wikipedia article about a living person. Just stop it. What you are doing is wrong here on every level possible. Jytdog (talk) 07:56, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If there was a reliable published source explaining why she was moved from S8 to S14, I'd take that ... but otherwise no. The best source you've provided is a primary source and use of it is original research. I've gone and protected the article; please discuss any changes that you want made on its talk page. Graham87 08:53, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.facebook.com/Amanda-Reid-1209059615812610/

here is her facebook page You I hope you find this helpful as it says she has cerebral palsy on it and some other stuff that maybe helpful

Not reliable, as I already told you. Jytdog (talk) 11:35, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How ??

She updates it but on other people pages have been updated from there team Facebook page

Two words for you. READ. WP:RS. The reason why sources like that are not OK, is very very clearly explained in that link. In the future, when you ask questions that show you haven't bothered to read WP:VERIFY, WP:BLP, and WP:RS I will just say "no". The reason will be that something on one of those three pages makes it obvious that the answer is no. Jytdog (talk) 11:41, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your so rude 1) I can't read that's why I asked 2) you didn't need to be so rude to me 3) you obviously don't like people with a learning disability 4) I seen 4 people on this page saying she has cp so there is a lot of people saying she has cp

Having a learning disability is no excuse for bad behavior and it is ugly that you would try to use it that way. You violated about four major Wikipedia policies last night, as I have told you several times. And you are reading what I am writing here, somehow. So you can read those policies the same way. You acted terribly all night long and I am frustrated with you. Jytdog (talk) 11:53, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Any your frustrating me

Block reviews[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).

Imcool246 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

this is my account I don't even know this coolpanda person I don't get it I have done nothing wrong

Decline reason:

I see no reason to doubt the results of the sockpuppetry investigation. Kinu ^t/_c 05:34, 26 May 2016 (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).

Imcool246 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I need to do school work I'm only 15 can you unblock me I have no clue who this coolpanda person is

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. 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
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:12, 26 May 2016 (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.

You don't need to be able to edit Wikipedia to use it as a reference for your schoolwork. You can read without logging in.

The evidence that we gathered from your behavior and from secret tools that Wikipedia has, shows that you were formerly editing under the Coolpanda username. There is no way around that.

You did three things wrong. 1) You used this account in addition to the Coolpanda account. 2) You worked with Matty to try to force the article to be how the two of you wanted it. 3) And both of you edit warred urgently and without regard for the policies and guidelines; you didn't care that everything you were doing was wrong in Wikipedia. We have rules in Wikipedia and they matter. Until you acknowledge you did all three of those things wrong (in a way that is believable) and promise never to do them again, there is no way you are going to get unblocked. You abused Wikipedia very badly. I kept telling you that, and you ignored me. So here you are - blocked. Jytdog (talk) 06:14, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Who the hell is this coolpanda person I have no clue what you are talking about It would be nice to tell me who this is

See Special:Contributions/Coolpanda1234. They did the same thing as you did, and after that account was blocked, this account opened and you did the same things. Plus the secret computer tools tell us both accounts are at the same place. Jytdog (talk) 06:27, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I live where there are a lot of people around me I really don't know this person I'm only 15 years old with a learning disability

That is not believable based on what you did and what Coolpanda did. You did the same thing. I am not going to respond further. I am sorry you got yourself into this bad situation. Jytdog (talk) 06:53, 26 May 2016 (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).

Imcool246 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand what I have done and will not do it again I'm getting help from school to show me how to use this website but I would help if I was unblock

Decline reason:

WP:NOTHERE. Talk page access revoked, as this is going nowhere. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 06:37, 26 May 2016 (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.