User talk:TheBellaTwins1445

Hello, TheBellaTwins1445! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message. (talk to me) (contributions) @ 01:33, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply] Getting Started Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community (The Signpost) Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

.. is there anyway possible I can met yall I am yalls biggest fan

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "TheBellaTwins1445", may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because it implies shared use. Accounts are for one person and one person only, and the username must reflect that. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change and the rest of the day before I of username, or you may simply create a new account for editing. Thank you. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 21:20, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why change my username ?? this name meets the Wikipedia policy and its not confused to other users, so please tell me why and I wait your answer thank you.

There are a couple problems with your username. First, it implies that you are the Bella Twins, so it's misleading in that way. Second, accounts are for one person and can't be shared. Your current name could be taken to mean that the Bella Twins are sharing the account. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 21:29, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So what I have to do ???

This page will tell you what you need to do. --w^{L<speak·check>} 05:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So is necessary to change my username cause I have made a lot of contributions with this name ???

You can change your username while keeping your contributions. ---w^{L<speak·check>} 20:20, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you need any help with changing your username, let me know. --w^{L<speak·check>} 04:26, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bellatwins1445 I need to talk to u please,drop your email or inbox me litiagxd@gmail.com Litiasikwibele (talk) 17:33, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I think this change made the grammar 'wrong':

before:  Rollins just after winning the WWE World Heavyweight Championship at WrestleMania 31

after:     Rollins just after win the WWE World Heavyweight Championship at WrestleMania 31

meant? Rollins just after win at the WWE World Heavyweight Championship at WrestleMania 31

Take a look?

BTW: This is not "everybody looking over your shoulder", but rather there is a mechanism by which people can add articles to their 'watchlist', like when an article has been vandalized a lot. So people just might see there was a recent edit to the article and check it out. (and maybe comment on it ;-o ) Shenme (talk) 04:46, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok guy sorry you are right thanks for help me with the article and contribution :)

Please see WP:JARGON. All articles should be able to be read and understood by anyone, not just people familiar with the subject matter. Therefore, a word like "heel" should not be used because it can easily be replaced with a word like "villain". Jargon can be explained in the text and used (but that sometimes makes the articles bulky and hard to follow), but it definitely should not be used in article headers. Furthermore, just because she is displaying some characteristics of a heel, it is original research to call her a heel unless an expert in the field called her one, so that information should be cited. Nikki♥311 00:11, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ScrapIronIV. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Cameron Lynn, 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. Scr★pIron^IV 14:06, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited WWE Diva, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MNM. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:45, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I don't know if I've messed up Layla's page or not, (Not that well experienced hense talking to you through disambiguation link) but if somehow you can correctly upgrade Layla's page for me, because I'm not doing it right. I'm trying to acknowledge Layla's involvement with the WWE video games such as WWE '13, WWE 2k14 and WWE 2K16, as well as adding in her signature move spin kick, or spinning back kick (used against nikki bella before twin magic at extreme rules 2012 for divas championship. And lastly, acknowledge her first major WWE theme song, Nasty Girl used from 2006-2009. If you came help me with this that would be soooo amazing, just want the whole world to acknowledge everything about Layla. If you can or can't do this, thank you anyways (I might of been a pain messing up the page a few times on you), but yeah, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.214.70.118 (talk) 20:19, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted your edit to the article - per WP:IMGSIZE:

Except with very good reason, do not use px (e.g. thumb|300px), which forces a fixed image width. (emphasis original)

All that does is forces how you wish it to be seen on other people. If you don't like the image sizes on your screen, it's possible to adjust how images appear since you're a logged in user. See Special:Preferences - the section called "Files". Tabercil (talk) 01:31, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here.  GILO   A&E⇑ 22:05, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Take a good look at the Mickie James/Tessa Blanchard image - specifically the left breast. There is no need for an image of a nip slip to be on her article. Tabercil (talk) 03:44, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You were blocked on the German Wikipedia for constantly changing images to a worse one without going to the article talk page and explaining there. Please have a look at your talk page at German Wikipedia and read the notes there. If you are unable to at least understand German language I would like to ask you to refrain from further contribs at de:wiki. --Pentachlorphenol (talk) 11:39, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And that is why over-writing an existing image with a new one is frowned upon on Commons - because it's not just EN that draws upon it. Tabercil (talk) 14:04, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to The Authority (professional wrestling). Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Nhajivandi (talk) 02:36, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@TheBellaTwins1445: I'm requesting you to join this Afd discussion. Your comment is valuable to us. Please help us reach a consensus. Thanks -Khocon (talk) 19:40, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please, stop. I know it's silly, but we include the entire name of the ptomotion in the header. Before 2011, the promotion was World Wrestling Entertainment. Since 2011, it's WWE. It's not the abreviation, are two different names. Like Jim Crockett Promotions/World Wrestling Championship. People like Sheamus, Ryder... signed with World Wrestling Entertainment and now, they work for WWE. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 16:17, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, this user is starting to piss me off with adding and re-adding "World Wrestling Entertainment" to Asuka's article. I've already told one person who was doing that on the same article. CrashUnderride 21:57, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well I have to say I wasn't doing any type of vandalism guy seriously, I don't even know how it was that of WWE abbreviation, now that I know it I can tell you this will not happen again.TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 12:09, 23, December 2015 (UTC)

Bullshit. Give me a direct link to whatever policy you think justifies this edit. Per Template:Cite web, "last" equals "surname of the author". In this case the surname is James. Names are always in the format "surname, first name". リボン・サルミネン (Ribbon Salminen)(ZOOM) 21:36, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• (However if you didn't notice, they still remain as finisher even for just one use.)

A finisher in professional wrestling is defined by its repeated use. If winning a single match would qualify it as a finisher, then you'd have to watch every match she's ever had and list everything she's ever finished a match with as a finisher, and moves like small packages would be on everyone's finisher list. The Wiki guide for pro wrestling requires an official source listing the move as a finisher or multiple sources showing that it has been used as a finisher anyway.

• (The link provided don't even fits if it is a fiable or unrelievable source.)

Please clarify. Sherick (talk) 18:21, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Well yeah I have seen the Wiki page of professional wrestling, however it still doesn't matters the time the finisher move has been used if the use just at one still doesn't matters why ? theay can still use them in other type of occasions or at lest for once done per years. This kind of sources can be added at the time the use them.

Yes it does. You need an official source stating that explicitly that that is a finisher. Same goes with signatures, which is why your moves were deleted. You can not list every move a performer has ever performed. Read the Style Guide before you edit again, otherwise I will take it to dispute the next time.

• You mus learn how to put sources, like name, title etc..., the source you provide for her current relationship doesn't even says nothing about, you must put a real reliable source of her actual relationships. And actually Wrestlezone its not an reliable source even a Twitter one could work for it.

WrestleZone has been cited as a credible source before. And no, adding names and titles is not necessary for sources such as this. Again, please read a style guide before attempting to moderate a page.

Also for the record, I brought this discussion to your page before reverting anything again. You decided to continue editing without addressing the complaint, then reverted my edits immediately before responding. This is improper form and gives you no basis to act indignant.Sherick (talk) 23:38, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Finishers still remain as finishers not mattering how many time they have been done but, however, I don't get it and didn't complain to what you are saying so how do we finish ?TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 3:36, February 15, 2016 (UTC)

• No that is categorically not true. From the Professional wrestling style guide: For Signature moves, there must be one reliable source explicitly mentioning that it is a signature move of the wrestler. One reliable source merely mentioning that the wrestler performed the move is not enough.

This must apply to finishers as well. I will not revert immediately but will plan to do so soon. Any further reverts will constitute an edit war and go to complaints. Sherick (talk) 23:48, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know Lana (wrestling) is totally protected now, but I started a thread at WP:AN/3RR before that. That's here if you are interested.LM2000 (talk) 03:18, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes I believe this user should of be blocked for his irrelevant edits I'm interested on what should I do ?TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 12:33, March 13, 2016 (UTC)

• Just thought you should know I started a thread there. If you have anything to add you can make a comment there.LM2000 (talk) 20:08, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• And he's blocked for 3 months and Lana (wrestling)'s full protection is removed. All is right with the world once again.LM2000 (talk) 20:49, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know you're newbie here, but you need to understand the rules: week by week editions are prohibited.

You are trying to make the pages of Lana and Summer Rae be bigger without any important information, just adding long sentences.

If you continue with the war of edits I'll denounce him for not complying the rules. This isn't the first time you're involved in a war of edits. Thank you.

-- HunteWinchester123 (Discussão)

Stop trolling. Maryse's return was confirmed by WWE's official channel on youtube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CLe1_pf95g

"Razor Ramon confronts the brand new Intercontinental Champion, The Miz and the returning Maryse."

Have a good day kid.

-- HunteWinchester123 (Discussão)

Hey there. Would just like to quickly stop by to mention your recent revert to my removal of your edits. I removed all sources and info for Flowing DDT due to the sources not mentioning it at all. WP:PW states that "these items should only be listed when a reliable source is present". Although WrestleView is a reliable source, all references must show/mention any info shown on the article that is sourced from the reference. Because if not, what's the point of even including the in-line citation when it doesn't prove anything, you know? Hope this helps! Sekyaw (talk) 03:06, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Maryse Ouellet, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charity. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:14, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Maryse Ouellet. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 13:36, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, early you received a post about being warned from being blocked. That was an imposter who created a similar username, but with only 1 “p” at User:Winterystepe. He's now blocked. im just letting you know that Im the real person and I won't do that. Shoutout to Tassedethe for taking quick action in 6 minutes. Happy Editing Winterysteppe (talk) 00:29, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Ok, Thank you so much.TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 7:21, April 13, 2016 (UTC)

check the spelling of my name. Also im gonna send you an email. Winterysteppe (talk) 00:40, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes ok.TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 7:40, April 13, 2016 (UTC)

• I can't email you but, my user name si Winterysteppe. That is Winter with a "y" and the word steppe. That is 2 "p". It refers to steppe. I meant to evoke a view of this. Winterysteppe (talk) 00:57, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Ok no problem bro.TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 8:41, April 13, 2016 (UTC)

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

Now that I have your attention, I am strongly urging you and HunteWinchester123 to head to the Maryse Ouellet talk page and calmly talk out your differences. No more blind reverts or edit warring on the article, otherwise I'll make use of my admin bit and start handing out involuntary Wikibreaks to folks. P.S. I've left an identical message on TheBellaTwins1445' page. Tabercil (talk) 04:24, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Her wrestling infobox is attached to her main infobox, much like John Cena's and Dwayne Johnson's. We don't need a separate one with identical information in her wrestling section.LM2000 (talk) 23:40, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I resized it smaller because when it is big, it looks blurred to me. It doesn't look blur to you? starship.paint ~ KO 02:08, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. There's a discussion at Talk:Team B.A.D.#Summer, Emma, Lana that you may be interested in. I suggest you participate in the ongoing discussion on Summer Rae, Lana, and Emma as past members of Team B.A.D. Sekyaw (talk) 20:45, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So you claim that 30 seconds in an NXT promo makes that La Sombra's wp:common name?? Please read that again because clearly you misinterpreted it if you think 30 seconds trumps almost 10 years in Mexico and Japan. It is not "current name" after all.  MPJ-US  19:26, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Well sorry I got to say I wasn't concerned about but you don't have to be mean just for saying this. I just follow the fact that was her name on WWE personnel and almost all the new debuting wrestler received their names by promos.TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 2:32, 27, May 2016 (UTC)

Please stop with the edit warring on the La Sombra article, especially over what is primarily his signature moves pre-NXT. Those have been there for a LONG time and the sources specifically list them as "signature moves". The need for multiple sources is to demonstrate it is a moves a wrestler uses a lot - but if there is a source stating they are "signature" then that is all that is needed, not multiple. Only possible issue is his finisher as Andrade Almas, but you've gone way beyond that.

Side note, you actually violated the Three Revert Rule - which can lead to getting blocked. If the mindless reverting of content continues without actually discussing it with the other party I will report both of you for edit warring as you are causing the article to be unstable,  MPJ-US  18:30, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Why do you think what I'm dong is vandalism have you actually have seen the Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Style guide there it states everything an wrestling page of a wrestler need to have and if you quickly go and see the in wrestling section there is stated "One reliable source merely mentioning that the wrestler performed the move is not enough", in fact there are not more than just one source for each move and also the sources given are not even reliable they are just book pages and a profile from the Sombra wrestler. So please if you mind why I revert the editions here is my speech about and before you accuse somebody of making vandalism firstly investigate about thank you .TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 2:26, June 12, 2016 (UTC)

• Yes I have read it, I helped write it. Have you actually read what I posted and the 3RR link I provided? Nowhere is there a reference to vandalism, please re-read what I wrote and stop putting words in my mouth. If you think you're in the right then hey go for it, roll that dice on the 3 Revert Rule after doing 4 reverts in a day already. MPJ-US  20:02, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

	The Editor's Barnstar
	This is for your dedicated work on professional wrestling-based articles. wL<speak·check> 19:01, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you so much for the accomplishment, I hope in the future I get more of this thanks.TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 4:30, June 30, 2016 (UTC)

Hi. About my edition in Nia Jax... well, it's something against nicknames. This year, people uses every match, video or tweet to include new nicknames. Ambrose said "i'm the iron man" and Iron Man is a nickname. Wyatt "i'm he horror" The Horror. Same for Twitter and Instagram. Wrestlers uses hastags "We're the Queens", "Say hello to the Skull Queen"... and suddenly, these are new nicknames. However, Twitter and Instagram are reliable sources if the accounts are verified. X marries Y, is a fact. Using a hastag as nickname, it's out interpretation. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 12:02, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Ok, thanks for the feedback.TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 13:23, July 15, 2016 (UTC)

If you continue to revert every edit that is done to any WWE personal article as you have done repeatedly today and do not stop edit warring with other editors I will have no choice but to involve an Admin. Because you don't want something on an article does not give you the right to continue reverting everyone's edits. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 20:44, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Alexa Bliss 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 article's 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. LM2000 (talk) 20:45, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea why you've spent the day repeatedly reverting people, this is something you clearly need to discuss before continuing. During the previous brand split we did list brands in the intro.LM2000 (talk) 20:47, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Well then start a discussion about I'm not trying to vandalize anything this editors just add what ever they see on the programs this isn't necessary that is the why I ask you if you can help me starting a discussion to close this.TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 03:46, July 21, 2016 (UTC)
  • I do not have any idea about adding brand splits on top I fairly think that is not necessary since the already work for the company and we don't need to add brands where can we start a discussion about it ?TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 03:49, July 21, 2016 (UTC)

• I would recommend discussing it at WT:PW.LM2000 (talk) 20:50, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I have just started a discussion on help me to find some help on this case and close as fast as possible I also invite you to. Thanks.TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 03:55, July 21, 2016 (UTC)

WWE used this theme on the Main Roster when she returned to it. [1] --w^{L<speak·check>} 04:23, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we know this mod just loves her, hence the reverting.PeterMan844 (talk) 09:26, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Watch Bille Kay's profile in wwe.com. Her height is 5ft 8in. Not 5ft 10in.--Shinkazamaturi (talk) 16:21, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Bayley (wrestler) 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 article's 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.
Just let the new user edits go unapproved until we get sources. w^{L<speak·check>} 02:17, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don't start an edit war over this, match happened you admit yourself it happened. No reason to revert. Not everything on TV can be sourced. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 01:54, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Who said that, show me a real source where it is stated that, I'm not going to start anything as I'm already getting tired of that, but show me where does it is stated that.TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 01:57, July 27, 2016 (UTC)

You reverted that IP then you didn't even check before reverting me after I said it was sourced as it happened on a LIVE program. It's right on the WWE site you could have checked the site and added the source for it yourself instead of reverting, it took me a whole 2 seconds to pull up and add it. Not everything on TV can be sourced right when it happens sometimes you have to look for it which is what you should have done before doing any reverts, you knew the match happened as well. http://www.wwe.com/shows/smackdown/smackdown-live-july-26-2016 Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 02:11, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:Link rot, don't delete a source just because it's link is dead. Instead, add a {{dead link}} template after it. This helps alert people to try to find an archived version of the page and use that instead. --w^{L<speak·check>} 08:17, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Ok thank you for the info, it would not happen again.TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 13:13, August 5, 2016 (UTC)

If a template:cite web is being used, another alternative is adding |dead-url=yes to it. I usually add |dead-url=no by default when using this template since, if I am including an archive link, it will not default to the archive unless I want it to. Ranze (talk) 03:38, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Senin o güzel amını yiyim amına kodumun çocugu orospu evladı orospuuubuu amına job girsin iyi günler --w^{L<speak·check>} 08:17, 5 August 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by KaşarTheBellaTwins1445 (talk • contribs) [reply]

• God, please speak a language I can understand.TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 23:20, August 19, 2016 (UTC)

I got an Admin and got that account that was clearly harassing you and copying your name banned. Next time someone makes a name close to yours like that and starts harassing you like they were doing go to an Admin. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 00:05, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes thank again my friend.TheBellaTwins1445^(talk) 00:18, August 19, 2016 (UTC)

Please, stop removing that. First, last edition of PWI Magazine includes the PWI Female ranking [2]. Second, PWI doesn't announced it, but third party sources did it. Mediotiempo is a reliable source and includes the first 10 wrestlers of the ranking (+ Kobra Moon). Also, Diva Dirt released the full list, which is a reliable source for female wrestlers. We don't need a confirmation from PWI if we have other reliable sources talking about it. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 23:15, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I never heared about Managers order is chronological. I think is, like moves and championships, alphabetical.

Hello, TheBellaTwins1445. 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]

Hi there. I'm not understanding why you keep reverting the citation and the addition of Emma's middle name. The source is credible and there's no reference disputing it. DantODB 04:47, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, please stop making disruptive edits to pages of the women of WWE. Diva Dirt may not be listed as a reliable source, but it is not listed as an unreliable source either, so it is at the discretion of the information presented. Thanks. DantODB 04:17, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

The edits have proven to be disruptive altogether. Why was the Snap DDT removed? It was clearly cited with a source that is WWE.com. Reverted it back. DantODB 00:55, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi there. It's not about what I want or what you want on the page. It is the most accurate information we can find. Your edits are considered bold and you removed references to information, but not the information itself, rendering the edits unnecessary. I wouldn't mind this being considered an edit war and for an administrator to come in. I'm trying to do my best to maintain the accuracy of the page. Thanks. DantODB 11:23, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't mind being flagged for edit warring if it means maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the page. Grammatically correct sentences are very important to list information. Also, Forbes is a mainstream news site that does not especially pertain to pro wrestling, so it is not reliable nor unreliable. If the information directly mirrors a television episode that happened, then there is no point to question the accuracy of that information. Thanks. DantODB 09:28, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi there,

I made edits to Alicia Fox's page to ensure that all of the information are presented in grammatically correct statements. I would appreciate it if these edits could be maintained. Thank you. DantODB 01:49, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I see that you've reverted an edit on the Billie Kay and Peyton Royce articles to make the information presented more accurate. Grammatically correct sentences are of utmost importance and it would be great if we all could work towards making it a priority. Thank you so much! 2602:304:CD91:68A0:A5DC:B35A:27CB:4D73 (talk) 21:56, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, another friendly reminder to please make sure all information put into articles are grammatically correct. Thank you. 2602:304:CD91:68A0:FCF6:C489:8A79:48D6 (talk) 00:56, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me how WWE.com isn't a reliable source for a finishing move. 2602:304:CD91:68A0:FCF6:C489:8A79:48D6 (talk) 01:01, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

I would like to point out that articles don't belong to any one editor in particular. I would also like to respectfully ask you to please stop reverting edits that correct and/or enhance the language in which the information is presented. Also, I don't know if you've been watching SmackDown, but Alexa Bliss has clearly used the DDT multiple times, the latest being her very first title defense/last televised match, which she won. At the end of the day, we're all here to make Wikipedia better. If you don't stop, I will be sure to get an administrator involved and assess the situation themselves. Thanks. 2602:304:CD91:68A0:1929:488:C41B:DA4D (talk) 04:30, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've reported this user already I think you should too he is constantly vandalizing every article and I think more than one report will do him right MatthewTardiff 15:28, 2 January 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatthewTardiff (talk • contribs)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Murder of Selena into Selena. 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, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. 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. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but 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. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:53, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo BellaTwins, and @Bkonrad: If I can step in to explain the problem you're having at Victoria... She didn't belong on the disambiguation page at Victoria, unless you can prove that she's commonly known as plain "Victoria" without any surname. People known as "Victoria + surname" are listed at Victoria (name), to which I've now added her. The first line of the disambiguation page makes it clear that this is where to look for a list of people with the name Victoria. I hope that's clearer now. Happy editing! PamD 18:03, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do you k ow this user, this user keeps on putting Lexi on Alexa bliss without providing a reliable source im coming to you since you have been on Wikipedia longer than me and if I keep on reverting the nick name I'm probably going to get blocked any advise? HardcoreWrestlingFan 04:58, 30 May 2017 (UTC) HardcoreWrestlingFan 04:58, 30 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by HardcoreWrestlingFan (talk • contribs)

Hi there. Just wanted to elaborate on the Nikki Cross article. Her participation in the Last Woman Standing match should not be in the opening because it's not significant by itself. An example of significance would be Sasha Banks' matches. Sasha Banks and Bayley's Iron Man match was more historical not only because of the match itself, but for the length, the status of it being the first women's main event of a televised special, and the accolades it received. The Hell in a Cell match was part of the paragraph detailing her feud against Charlotte, not by itself. I hope that's clear. DantODB (talk) 03:26, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TheBellaTwins1445. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Colegio de Bachilleres, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

1. edit the page
2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

PamD 19:33, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't remove dana brooks' weight. TheSecondCitySaint (talk) 08:30, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article Jessie Elaban has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. reddogsix (talk) 00:06, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article Jessie Elaban has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:ENTERTAINER. No significant coverage in reliable independent sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Nikki♥311 01:20, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jessie Elaban is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jessie Elaban until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Nikki♥311 03:12, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Thea Trinidad. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. 79.72.141.179 (talk) 14:51, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TheBellaTwins1445. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Your edits on various Selena articles are not productive, and those on Selena y Los Dinos, where you keep reinserting verbose accounts of her death, are just really inappropriate. Drmies (talk) 03:53, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is complicated. I don't think your drawing of your shrine to Selena is appropriate on Wikipedia except to illustrate a tribute to Selena such as in Selena#Posthumous film and honors. I can under your desire to have an illustration of Selena in 1995, but an actual drawing of Selena, or properly licensed images of her monument or her grave seem preferable. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 10:05, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

--John (talk) 17:51, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Asuka (wrestler), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Raw (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) 09:25, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you have some problem, report to the wikiproject. That's how we do things. It's just like the Impact title changes. The match happened, it's reported, it's sourced. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 22:07, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, BellaTwins. I readed a discussion in the project talk page. I saw that the dates in the entrance themes are unsources and your partner Nikki311 is removing all of them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.150.224.238 (talk) 19:32, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I saw you recently started the reviews for both GANs Naomi (wrestler) and A. J. Lee. I know those articles have been waiting a while for a reviewer (over six months each), but there is an issue with your previous contributions to each article (335 edits/#1 contributor to Naomi, and 72 edits/#8 contributor to AJ Lee). One of the instructions on reviewing articles is that you must not have made major contributions to the article (per WP:GAREV). It seems best to let an uninvolved person review these articles instead, even if it means waiting longer. Let me know what you think. Prefall 18:28, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please note: with that level of contribution to both of these articles—you are a major contributor by any definition—you are not eligible to be reviewing them. I am therefore nominating both reviews for speedy deletion, and will put them back into the pool of nominations awaiting an eligible reviewer with no loss of seniority. I hope it won't be too much longer for a reviewer to claim them. Best of luck. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:49, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you added and removed information from Naomi (wrestler) without consensus or explanation per this diff. I restored the previous content from the professional wrestling career section because your edit contained week-to-week reports that are best avoided despite being properly sourced. Thanks! DantODB (talk) 20:33, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove all Pro Wrestling.net sources on Alexa Bliss' article and claim them to be unreliable when WP:PW/RS clearly states that Pro Wrestling.net is a reliable source? Please don't make claims that sources are unreliable when the WP:PW/RS clearly states otherwise. TheDeviantPro (talk) 03:10, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for File:The Living Idol (1957).jpg

Thanks for uploading File:The Living Idol (1957).jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 19:00, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The undo was done because you linked two unrelated articles causing an overlink, on my end both links were not redirected to the same article. Can you elaborate on what is going on in your end? Best – jona ✉ 13:16, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to get this resolve. – jona ✉ 16:27, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have nominated Amor Prohibido for FA, if you're interested in commenting or leaving a review it would be greatly appreciated, if not it's all good =). Have a good day – jona ✉ 21:32, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's a video from the official WWE NXT twitter in which Royce specifically names her finisher as The Ugh. It may not be named as such anymore, but it was at one point. Please do not remove it again. NiciVampireHeart 21:12, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did you seriously remove information from November '17 onwards because it wasn't sourced, and then slap an 'update' tag on the article? Did you even look for sources? 10 minutes and everything was sourced And that's not even mentioning the fact that you added {{BLP sources|section|date=May 2018}} to a section that no longer had any unreferenced material, because you removed it all. Please be more judicious in your tagging of "problems" in future. NiciVampireHeart 23:30, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Dana Brooke. Seriously? Special:Diff/842502620 is completely unacceptable. Do not restore falsified references again. NiciVampireHeart 00:21, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Style guide is how the pro wrestling articles should be written according to WP:PW/SG. It includes things like what should be italicized or not, how to refer to the weekly shows, etc. I edited the whole section to obey the style guide and you undid it for no reason. The part where it says her tag team match with Becky was her first on the brand was removed because it's unnecessary since it can be inferred from the context. The Mandy Rose thing was a televised match that was part of the build to a title match at a PPV, there's no reason to ignore it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BLXCKPXGX (talk • contribs) 14:54, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invitation to discuss. Concerning this edit [3], song titles appear only in quotation marks, not in boldface, per MOS:QUOTETITLE. Is there another reason you put it in boldface? I was only removing the boldface, not the text, and from your comment I think you may not have realized? Let me know --Bsherr (talk) 17:01, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've reinstated my edit, but please let me know if you wish to discuss further. --Bsherr (talk) 18:39, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		Thank you for creating several articles on women and their works over the past few weeks. We have become aware of your contributions thanks to research undertaken by Bobo.03 at the University of Minnesota. We think you might be interested in becoming a member of our WikiProject Women in Red where we are actively trying to reduce Wikipedia's content gender gap. You can join by using the box at the top of the WiR page. But if you would like to receive news of our activities without becoming a member, you can simply add your name to our mailing list. In any case, thank you for actively contributing to the coverage of women (currently, 17.64% of English Wikipedia's biographies). Our priorities this month: WiR Loves Pride Singers and Songwriters Women in GLAM Geofocus: Russia/USSR #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Ipigott (talk) 11:07, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TheBellaTwins1445 . I noticed that you used ethnicelebs.com as a source for information in a biography article, Lisa Lopes. Please note that there is general consensus that ethnicelebs.com does not meet the reliable sourcing criteria for the inclusion of personal information in such articles. (See User_talk:XLinkBot/RevertList#EthniCelebs.com). If you disagree, let's discuss it. Thanks. --Ronz (talk) 03:33, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Dana Brooke. Thank you. (See Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_153#Is_famousbirthdays.com_a_reliable_source_for_personal_information). --Ronz (talk) 22:21, 13 June 2018 (UTC) [reply]

Hello, I'm HHH Pedrigree. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Bruno Sammartino 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.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Ronda Rousey. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. HHH Pedrigree (talk) 20:12, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, is there a reason you're edit warring with me on Lisa Lopes? I get that you did a drawing, and that's great -- but this isn't the place to showcase your artwork. The image I added is covered under WP:Fair Use as outlined by the image's summary: here. I've placed a note on my talk page to have someone more familiar with Wikipedia take a look at both of our edits, as I don't feel like it's the proper place to showcase a drawing.

--65.35.254.12 (talk) 01:21, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Lisa Lopes while logged out. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting and doing so may result in your account being blocked from editing. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. — IVORK _Discuss 22:30, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do not continue to WP:EDIT WAR, as you are doing with your recent edit to Grace VanderWaal. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:12, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Eliot my name is jayson how can i help WWE Article like you my email is jaysonboricua787321787@hotmail.com hope i herd from you real soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:387:9:3:0:0:0:B3 (talk) 18:47, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you adding the resting place of Sridevi again and again? It is mentioned later that Sridevi was cremated at Vile Parle Samaj Crematorium and that her ashes were scattered. Don't add such things that are unnecessary in a Wikipedia page Sreeveen (talk) 09:39, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TheBellaTwins1445. 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. Once the block has expired, you're welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Bbb23 (talk) 17:29, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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 ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 22:17, 19 July 2018 (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).

TheBellaTwins1445 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Oh god, no please I already understand that it is not right to make multiple accounts, but I never did them on purpose of vandalism, I did them on purpose of continue helping Wikipedia, it is such a hobby for me to edit Wikipedia that I even became a member of the Wikiproject of professional wrestling, and I even create articles worth for Wikipedia, I even have helped a lot of time for anti-vandalism, I have added sources to articles that have needed them, pictures, I have created and uploaded pictures for Wikipedia article with any image, and I even help to make articles here on Wikipedia in English to get better, you can even check for the analysis of this pages where I have being a top contributor for them such as:

Mae Young

Ramón Valdés

Tamina Snuka

Paulette Gebara Farah (I create this article)

Colegio Americano del Noreste shooting (I create this article)

Summer Rae

Nikki Cross

Dolores O'Riordan

Please please, I beg you to dont do this to me, I already learned my lesson, never in life would I create more accounts, but please dont do this to me, hope you hear me.

What i want is to continue helping Wikipedia on English and not doing any kind of vandalism stuff, you can even check the accounts which I create where I didnt do any kind of vandalism and instead I tried to improve some articles I was allowed to edit. Plase I have done worth work for Wikipedia I beg you to understand. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 15:44, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Huh, since when using socks to vote on your own FA nomination is helping Wikipedia? Max Semenik (talk) 20:25, 21 July 2018 (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).

TheBellaTwins1445 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Please Max Semenik, I know that was a real bad mistake, but I already knew my lesson and I was even sanctioned with a block of 1 week from Wikipedia which was the reason I created another accounts to continue doing some helping work on Wikipedia without any intention of vandalism, again you can even check my edits from that accounts from which I didnt do any kind of vandalism activity but to help some articles. I already learned my lesson from that FAC nomination thing I did and I was already sanctioned from that, please my intentions are real good and all I just want to do is to help. Hope you hear me I am a good intentionate person. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 20:53, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Loquis56489 (talk · contribs) was clearly editing in bad faith. During your block, you set up Perritos4555 (talk · contribs) and Monosde2036 (talk · contribs). There's no conclusion I can draw other than you were deliberately and maliciously violating WP:SOCK, having been previously blocked for this. The block is appropriate, you have shown multiple times that you cannot be trusted here. As I see it, you have exactly two options now. First, you can wait at least six months, then apply under WP:SO and address your actions directly rather than trying to claim you had no intention of harming Wikipedia. Your second option is that you can keep doing with your current behaviour, in which case you will be banned forever, under WP:3X. Yamla (talk) 12:47, 22 July 2018 (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).

TheBellaTwins1445 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I think I have already had my lesson, please I am beggin for an unlock, hope youhear me.TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 01:32, 19 November 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Decline reason:

You seem to be struggling with the concept of "six months without socking". Yunshui ^雲_水 09:17, 19 November 2018 (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.

•  Checkuser note: The master socked with IPs in October-November.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:45, 19 November 2018 (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).

TheBellaTwins1445 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Its been already six months and we are on New Years eve, please I already learned my lesson. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 19:45, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

See the note above. If you evaded your block in October-November, that of course resets the "six months without socking" timer. It also makes it ever more difficult to trust you in general. Please note that the six months without socking are not a guarantee to get unblocked. Huon (talk) 19:51, 1 January 2019 (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).

TheBellaTwins1445 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Time has passed and I have already understand my lesson; this block is no longer necessary because I have understand why I was blocked at first, I will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and I will make useful contributions instead. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 20:28, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Hahahaha, very funny. No, really. You have to go six months without socking. Elton2978 was editing this month, so six months from now. At that point, you'd need a substantially more convincing unblock request than this. I'm pretty sure you just want to be banned, though, based on your continued abuse. Yamla (talk) 20:53, 9 June 2019 (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.

As a checkuser has found you have evaded your initial indefinite block on at least two separate times, with three separate accounts, you are now one strike away from a WP:3X ban. Any further editing of any sort may result in your indefinite ban from Wikipedia. --Yamla (talk) 21:02, 9 June 2019 (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).

TheBellaTwins1445 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

There have been already six months since my block, I am asking to be unblocked, I have already understand that vandalism stuff is not correct, I want to create new articles here, please I beg to you, I have really understand my bad hope someone helps me already. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 20:08, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. As per below, you are now banned under WP:3X. You may apply to the community for an unban no sooner than six months from now. At that time, you will need a substantially more convincing request. Yamla (talk) 10:30, 20 December 2019 (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.

It looks to me like you've been editing while logged out. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:13, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oi. You mean recently.-- Deepfriedokra 23:02, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, pretty recently. I'm certain there were edits in November, at the very least. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:32, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And, I might add for the sake of clarity abstain from editing Wikipedia with either a different account or while logged out.-- Deepfriedokra 11:16, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Leaning unblock but need further thoughts. This is a CU block, so we need to hear from @Bbb23: before contemplating further. I suppose, based on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/TheBellaTwins1445/Archive, that there should be a prohibition against participating in Wikipedia:Featured article candidates for at least 6 months post unblock. I'd like to hear more about what constructive edits the user would make, though the socking at WP:FAC would tend to chill my enthusiasm.-- Deepfriedokra 21:01, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Based on NinjaRobotPirate's comments above, the unblock request should be declined, and given that he keeps socking over and over, I don't think we should consider another unblock request for at least one year.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:43, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• In that instance, this would become a Wikipedia:Banning policy#Bans for repeated block evasion ban.-- Deepfriedokra 02:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Seriously what king of vandalism I have being doing? god all I have done is improve Wikipedia articles, I havent done anything wrong, how cant I be unblocked god...? dude Bbb23 please I beg you all I have done is to improve Wikipedia. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 01:19, 23 December 2019 (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).

TheBellaTwins1445 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Six months have passed and almost a year, I think its fair that I can became unblock, this TheBellaTwins1445 account will be forever my only account ever, if there is a way of deleting the other ones I hope someone can help me, but for now I think is fair to ask for my unblock, I have being doing a wonderful job on the Spanish Wikipedia, which is my natal language, if you might check too, I beg to whoever sees this to please finish this, trust me this will forever be my only Wikipedia account. I love doing this editing job. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 06:06, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

More IP socking. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:25, 1 June 2020 (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.

NinjaRobotPirate, IP socking, but men I have been doing constructive editing not any kind of vandalism. I have even look for unsourced info and helping to take it out from Wikipedia. If you actually gave me the chance to return I could even referenced info in that situations and even create new articles, I just need you to trust me please, I am not asking now, I beg please just give me one more chance and youll see. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 15:41, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have a chance to return. WP:SO. You are not eligible under that until you have gone six months with zero edits. The fact that you are evading your block, in violation of WP:EVADE, shows that you have no intention at the moment of following our policies and guidelines. You've demonstrated with crystal clarity that you cannot be trusted at this time. --Yamla (talk) 16:48, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

{unblock|Six months passed, lesson learned. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 17:07, 1 January 2021 (UTC)}[reply]

You are banned, not blocked. You'll need to follow the process outlined at WP:UNBAN. Simply claiming "six months passed, lesson learned" is nowhere near sufficient to be unbanned. --Yamla (talk) 18:53, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

TheBellaTwins1445 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have followed the unbanned process of WP:UNBAN, I submitted an appeal to UTRS and asked an administrator to post it to the appropriate discussion board, and they have sended me back here to use the unblock template on my talk page, here is the UTRS discussion made - https://utrs-beta.wmflabs.org/public/appeal/view?hash=60e7e2f6059eb4864da62fe3480ba578 here I have put my proposal and petition for my unblocking, the same I made at UTRS, thank you and hope someone answers me. Hello, a long time ago my account on the English Wikipedia was blocked because of sockpuppetering with multiple accounts. I know it was wrong, but all I wanted to do was to continue working here on Wikipedia and edit articles in a constructive manner, not wanting to commit any kind of vandalism. Also I was a kind a fool with Wikipedia, like yeah I have being editing for a long time, but it was just like some kind of part time thing, but now I do love to help editing articles, so certainly this time I am taking all of this in a serious way. TheBellaTwins1445 will be my only account forever, if someone can help me deleting all of the others, I will be really grateful. Hope this time you trust on me. Thank you and ill wait for your response. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 00:18, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Accept reason:

per discussion linked below — Ched (talk) 04:57, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For Closer Notice: Just a note that anyone who closes the AN discussion may of course override the hold above Nosebagbear (talk)

• I have unblocked per discussion at: [4]. The discussion there lifts your "ban" as well. — Ched (talk) 04:54, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to address the concerns of your username at User talk:Cullen328. I did a quick check and while you do apparently edit at times in various WWE articles, I don't see any direct editing to either of the Bella Twins in any excessive or improper manner. Still, when a concern is raised, it's always best to talk it out with a person. Best of luck in your future editing. — Ched (talk) 05:03, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dolores del Río, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York. 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) 06:00, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TheBellaTwins, I'm disappointed to see your pattern of editing at Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on education and other articles. It is not acceptable to swap out quality images, such as File:امتحانات نهایی در شرایط کرونا 3470479.jpg, with clearly inferior ones like File:Student during Coronavirus in Mexico (cropped).jpg that you uploaded yourself. A lot of effort has gone into selecting quality images for COVID-19 pages, and it's disrespectful of that effort to toss it aside just so you can see your own work on prominent pages. Please stop. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 07:24, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have continued to add the image to high-prominence pages and to edit war when others have reverted you. Please stop. The image is not compelling (the technical quality is very poor and it doesn't make sense that he's wearing a mask if it's from his home), and although you might be able to make a case for it on one or two pages where it's relevant, adding it to high-profile pages like Andrés Manuel López Obrador is not appropriate. Please do not re-add it—WP:NOTHERE behavior is something that can lead to blocks just as much as socking. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:50, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Mexican companies established in 1992 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy 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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:45, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Professional wrestling, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Split.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @TheBellaTwins1445:, I'm only going to request this once – please stop reverting my edits without good reason. Your claim that every biography on here has its own death section is just completely false, and all of the bios you listed in your edit as examples (e.g. Marilyn Monroe and Amy Winehouse) only have their own sections for their deaths because they were HUGE worldwide personalities and so there is enough to day about their deaths (including the tragic circumstances) to merit its own section. Every sentence does NOT require its own section. In most instances on Wiki, death is mentioned under "Personal life" or "Personal life and death". The idea of making a new section for it, when it cannot be expanded beyond a couple of sentences, is ridiculous. On another note – please respect the fact that you do not have a monopoly on the Mexican personality biographies on here just because you have a particular interest in them. Wikipedia is a community. If I, or another user, changes something on a page, and gives a reason for it, and you disagree, then take it to the respective talk page, rather than engage in an edit war. I've been on here for 15 years. I do know what I'm doing, and I'd appreciate it if we could show mutual respect. Thanks --Jkaharper (talk) 00:10, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am showing you respect, I am just asking for a page or an style guide where it says that what you are actually doing is correct. If there is some style guide or something where it says what you are doing, please show it to me. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 00:13, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@TheBellaTwins1445:, why have you pointlessly started a second conversation on my talk page? Keep it all in one place please. Go and read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout, specifically the "Body sections" part. I'm not trying to be difficult – I'm conveying the norm on here, and ask that you don't just "do your own thing". --Jkaharper (talk) 00:21, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1908, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Wright.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello TheBellaTwins1445! 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.

• 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. 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.
• We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
• 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 either 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.
• 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 described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

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. Moxy- 02:54, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Death of Paulette Gebara Farah, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Disappearance.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @TheBellaTwins1445: I noticed you moved Mundo de fieras (Mexican TV series) to Mundo de fieras (Mexican telenovela). Years ago it was discussed at Wikipedia:RFC TELENOVELA about using "telenovela" as a disambiguator. It was decided not to disambiguate by genre or format, i.e. "sitcom", "telenovela", "soap opera", etc. You can find the guideline at WP:NCTV. I have reverted your edit and moved the page back to Mundo de fieras (Mexican TV series). The same applies to the Mundo de fieras (Venezuelan TV series) page. — Telenovelafan215 (talk) 02:43, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for losing my cool briefly right there. Had been up all night working on my geography schoolwork and exam for Sac State. Pretty tired but excited for my Sacramento Kings game tonight. Plus we as a fanbase are still grieving for Scott Hall too. (and of course, my ever lasting pain as a Kings fan XD) Anyways be good my man!!!! :) DrewieStewie (talk) 21:36, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There were two sentences you removed or altered the original source's statements. If you feel as though they should be removed or altered, please take to the talk page and discuss it with other editors to gather consensus. It would also help if you can provide a summary with your edits when you do modify the article. Thanks – jona ✉ 20:05, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I was wondering if you would like to work on Selena-related articles together and bring them to GA/FA status. I am currently working on "Como la Flor", and my next goals are to finish the draft for Patsy Torres and then work on "La Carcacha" and "Amame". Let me know if you're interested. – jona ✉ 13:34, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Scott Hall shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. All my warmest wishes, ItsKesha (talk) 20:42, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See {{Clear}}. It does not work like what you thought. It's about the below section not the above stuff. Plus we may expand "Legacy" section and making her image bigger. So Clear should be there. Mann Mann (talk) 04:32, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Author parameter. See {{Cite web}}: this parameter is used to hold the complete name of a single author (first and last) or to hold the name of a corporate author. WWE Staff is a a corporate author.
• Redirects and piped links. Please do not convert redirects/shortcuts to piped links. This[5] was an unnecessary piped link because NXT Level Up is available as a redirect (simple/simplified link) and it is fine. Read WP:NOTBROKEN and WP:NOPIPEDLINK for more details.
• YouTube as a source. Please avoid excessive usage of YouTube videos as source/citation. Using the reliable sources listed on WP:PW/Sources should be priority. If you can't find your needed materials in those reliable PW sources, then go for WWE YouTube channel. --Mann Mann (talk) 01:53, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. How are you? You may like to expand, improve, and update these articles:

• Alexa Bliss, Gigi Dolin, Indi Hartwell, Isla Dawn, Kay Lee Ray, Nikkita Lyons, Rhea Ripley

I don't edit them regularly so they need another editor's attention. Regards. --Mann Mann (talk) 16:42, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted my Selena edit, which bummed me out. I made that edit because her siblings share the same last name after finding it unnecessary that her siblings' last names are said twice like "A.B. Quintanilla and Suzette Quintanilla" when I made it into "A.B. and Suzette Quintanilla". See what I mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chidie345 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In your recent edit to Blonde stereotype, you added links to an article which did not add content or meaning, or repeated the same link several times throughout the article. Please see Wikipedia's guideline on links to avoid overlinking. Please ensure you don't add links to articles that are already linked before, rule of thumb is one link at first mention in lead, and one link at first mention in the main body of the article, you added a second link to Jayne Mansfield making it a WP:REPEATLINK. TylerBurden (talk) 06:00, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you're intending it as a joke or an experiment, but your self-portrait in the top right quadrant of File:Punk Fashion collage.jpg, wearing a T-shirt and making a hand gesture, does not seem a great illustration of punk fashion. If you think this image belongs in any article, raise it on the talk page and request that somebody else add it, per Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#Supplying_photographs_and_media_files. --Lord Belbury (talk) 16:51, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please avoid changing headings/sections like [6][7][8] in the future. Not only your changes were not good (they were wrong and inaccurate) but you also ignored my work and long-term contributions to the article. --Mann Mann (talk) 05:12, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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 the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. MrOllie (talk) 15:45, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Before you continue violating the BLP policy, you must read WP:DOB. No exceptions on BLPs and you know it. Get a secondary source instead. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 02:17, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As per WP:BLPPRIMARY: "Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses. Where primary-source material has been discussed by a reliable secondary source, it may be acceptable to rely on it to augment the secondary source, subject to the restrictions of this policy, no original research, and the other sourcing policies". It is not our job to determine the "most likely scenario", it is our job to notate what sources say, including "clearly noting discrepancies". This is why Belinda Peregrín has two DOB even though we all know she was actually born in 1989. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 02:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 02:29, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Conalep Ing. Bernardo Quintana Arrioja is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conalep Ing. Bernardo Quintana Arrioja until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

NoonIcarus (talk) 23:18, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]