User talk:Jt029350

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Jt029350, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:06, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Department directory Help directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Why I Joined Wikipedia

I joined to help improve Wikipedia and make it bigger and better. I have noticed that some articles are not updated or have some false info and i intend to fix and correct them. I do not intend to vandalize pages. I apologize if the questions i leave on my talk page appear to be stupid. I intend to discuss things on my talk page that i think should be changed or replaced.

December 2014[edit]

Hey, this is Jt029350. I have edited Girl Meets World and i have proof that what i added was accurate. Take a look at my cite reference. Jt029350(talk) 16:43, December 14 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Geraldo Perez. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Girl Meets World, 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. Good to see you providing a reference this time, but unfortunately the one you are using, Wikia, isn't reliable. It is a fansite, anonymous editors and no reputation for fact checking. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:06, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference format was fine but the source you used isn't reliable. About the only use we have for Wikia is if they have a reference for their info and we that reference, not wikia itself. Published news sources are generally what we look for. See what is currently used for references and look there for new info. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:12, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry!! I was wrong. Your edit was correct. I looked at several other cites and they all have the same info that you entered. Sorry! Jt029350(talk) 22:23, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Editing suggestion

I'm not sure if there is already a discussion about this, but i think we should limit editing to only Wikipedia members, not anyone else. I have noticed that some articles are limited to only wikipedia members, so maybe we could do that to all of the articles. Jt029350(talk) 16.21, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

If by "Wikipedia members" you mean people with registered Wikipedia accounts, it has been discussed many times over many years. There are always some people who feel very strongly that editing should be restricted to people with accounts, but there are always more people who don't think so. For what it's worth, when I started editing I thought that allowing editing only by registered accounts was a good idea, but over the years as I have had more experience of how Wikipedia works I have come to the opinion that it would, in fact, be a mistake. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:20, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How to indent lines[edit]

I have taken the liberty of changing the formatting of the paragraph above under the heading "Why I Joined Wikipedia", to make it more readable. If you really wanted it the way it was, with the text disappearing off the right hand side of the page, please change it back, but my guess is that you didn't. For some reason the Wikimedia software formats any line that begins with a blank space in a way which is usually unhelpful. If you want a line to start with white space, instead of typing blanks at the beginning of the line, put one or more colons. Starting with one colon (:) will indent the line a little way, starting with several colons (:::) will indent it further. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:38, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

December 2014[edit]

Hi there! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to List of The Thundermans episodes does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! Chamith (talk) 05:21, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Girl Meets World. There is a reference there, your changes didn't match it Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:14, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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 why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. 5 albert square (talk) 19:59, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry[edit]

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for a period of indefinite for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jt029350. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 01:25, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

April 2015[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).

Jt029350 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have acknowledged my invalid edits to Wikipedia and I promise not to cause further destruction to any Wikipedia articles. I wish to be unblocked.

Decline reason:

Before unblock can be considered you need to give a valid and convincing reason for your abusive use of multiple accounts. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 12:32, 14 April 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.

I think the blocked editor owes it to the community to explain why he abused multiple accounts and persistently added false information to articles. How was he benefitting? What purpose did it serve? What exactly did he find funny about fudging ratings at Girl Meets World? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:41, 14 April 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]