User talk:USAQuidditch

April 2016

Welcome to Wikipedia. I have noticed that some of your recent genre changes, such as the one you made to Bastille (band), have conflicted with our neutral point of view and verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend you seek consensus for certain edits by discussing the matter on the article's talk page. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 16:08, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Byzantine Empire into Roman Empire. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. If you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 11:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see you are still not adding the required attribution, as required under the terms of the CC-by-SA license. Please have a look at this edit summary as an example of how it is done. Please let me know if you still don't understand what to do or why we have to do it. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 22:03, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Kill the Police - Destroy the System

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Kill the Police - Destroy the System, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Mayast (talk) 20:59, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

To enforce an arbitration decision and for violation of the sanctions already in effect on the page United States presidential election, 2016, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 19:42, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

June 2016

Hello. Some of your recent genre changes, such as the one you made to Merle Allin, have conflicted with our neutral point of view and verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend you seek consensus for certain edits by discussing the matter on the article's talk page. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 04:44, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bastille

Any reason why you keep editing Bastille and altering the lineup? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.151.67 (talk) 13:29, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

Hello, I'm CCS81. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Merle Allin has been undone because it did not appear constructive. 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. CCS81 (talk) 21:25, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from changing genres, as you did to Kiss You Tonight, without providing a source or establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Thank you. Hzh (talk) 03:11, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Jack Gaines. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Bastille has been undone because it did not appear constructive. 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. --Jack Gaines (talk) 16:13, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Discogs

Hello,

Discogs is not a reliable source for the line-up of the band. There will be an interview with the band in the NME tomorrow. Hopefully it will provide some details on the line up Karst (talk) 22:15, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good Grief

Hello, I'm Jack Gaines. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Good Grief (song) has been undone because it did not appear constructive. 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. --Jack Gaines (talk) 21:32, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

Hello, I'm Karst. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Bastille (band), but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Karst (talk) 22:31, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Good Grief (song). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Karst (talk) 22:33, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Wild World (album). Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Karst (talk) 22:34, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Gleaming Spires. Karst (talk) 07:41, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Torn Apart (Bastille song)

The article Torn Apart (Bastille song) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I am sorry, but there is no way that this passes WP:GNG; it hasn't charted, and the Google coverage is only routine. I'm not even convinced it requires a redirect.

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. Laun chba ller 18:50, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Bastille Good Grief.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bastille Good Grief.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:07, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, USAQuidditch. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]