User talk:TheKinkdomMan

TheKinkdomMan, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi TheKinkdomMan! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Liz (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

20:05, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

August 2017

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Paige (wrestler). 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:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
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. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 01:14, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have requested a page protection no one has done anything about it and I know the rules further more I shouldn't be the one singled out when I'm trying to do the right thing TheKinkdomMan (talk) 01:16, 4 August 2017 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan (talk) 01:16, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've already protected the page. And a belief that you are doing the right thing does not exempt you from edit warring. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 01:20, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for putting a protection on the page TheKinkdomMan (talk) 01:20, 4 August 2017 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan (talk) 01:20, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No your right it doesn't exempt me I admit I was in the wrong and I'm glad you pointed it out to me I apologize for my edit war and wrong doing TheKinkdomMan (talk) 01:21, 4 August 2017 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan (talk) 01:21, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seth Rollins

Hello, I see you reverted my revision with no edit summary. So why are wrestlers like Chris Jericho, the Undertaker, Dean Ambrose, Kurt Angle, Chris Benoit, and many others allowed to have the years shown when their finishers were active/present and not Seth Rollins, other than his usage of the pedigree? Sera404 (talk) 01:30, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There proveded with a source you need to reference them TheKinkdomMan (talk) 04:32, 9 February 2018 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan (talk) 04:32, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

Thank you for your contributions. One of your recent contributions has been reverted or removed, because it contains speculative or unconfirmed information about a future event. Please only add material about future events if it is verifiable, based on a reliable source. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:43, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Accord to Cameron Diaz IMDB her last acting role was in 2014 which is a reliable source I just went through this last month and the person was blocked for a edit war TheKinkdomMan (talk) 23:35, 20 February 2018 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan (talk) 23:35, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:WikiProject Film/Resources#Questionable resources and WP:Identifying reliable sources#User-generated content. IMDb is full of user-generated content with no editorial oversight for factual accuracy, and thus not appropriate to cite. Even if that was any good, it would be nothing more than speculation to say she's no longer active UNLESS she died or officially declared retirement before appearing in anything else. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:54, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It may be considered speculation but IMDB is very accurate and has not failed TheKinkdomMan (talk) 01:07, 21 February 2018 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan (talk) 01:07, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When’s the last time you saw her in a film or tv show, it was back in 2014 thus IMDB is completely accurate that’s all I’m saying TheKinkdomMan (talk) 01:08, 21 February 2018 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan (talk) 01:08, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bullet Club

Could you do me a favour. As an IP I can't edit as the page is protected. Please remove Gino Gambino. The edit adding him uses a source that doesn't support the assertion. Thanks in advance. 203.27.47.150 (talk) 04:29, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He used a valid/reliable source if you would like to create a account and edit that’s fine, but I suggest you learn the reliable and unreliable sources, best bet is to create an account TheKinkdomMan (talk) 20:11, 21 February 2018 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan (talk) 20:11, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I did as you asked and I still can't edit it. You ignored what I said (and I see that someone else also requested the edit on the talk page). The source doesn't assert he's a member of the Bullet Club. So it's wrong. NotMemberofBC (talk) 01:38, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But I will help you, if it wasn’t announced he is a member then it should be next time around but if someone cites a reliable source there’s nothing anyone can do about it unless your a administrator but I’ll contact one if that makes you feel better TheKinkdomMan (talk) 02:59, 22 February 2018 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan (talk) 02:59, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Administrator is looking into it to edit a page that’s protected you must be a confirmed user TheKinkdomMan (talk) 03:01, 22 February 2018 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan (talk) 03:01, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise for any policies I have breached. However, I've been trying to update the Bullet Club membership with the correct information for the last month with no success. I understand that many people aren't aware of Gambino's membership in the BC as he hasn't yet appeared on NJPW TV, however he is a member. He was added by Fale in November which I referenced correctly with a reliable source (Cagematch.com). He teamed with Fale twice in Australia as the Bullet Club, then represented the Bullet Club on an official NJPW Australian tour in singles matches and alongside Kenny Omega, Fale and Chase Owens. Then on the latest Being the Elite, (which I understand is not 'reliable' for Wikipedia's standards, however for the sake of proving membership in general it is clearly reliable) he was apart of a Bullet Club meeting that ended in everyone pulling Kenny and Cody apart. Fair enough I'll stop reverting the edits, but I would really like to reach a conclusion here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BelieveInTheShield (talk • contribs) 23:36, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did you add a reliable source if so then it can be kept, just add a reliable source that’s all you have to do and if it’s reliable I’ll back you up 100% TheKinkdomMan (talk) 00:40, 26 February 2018 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan (talk) 00:40, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I’ll back you 100% cagematch is a reliable source, go ahead and revert my edit or reverted add it TheKinkdomMan (talk) 00:43, 26 February 2018 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan (talk) 00:43, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Hardy

Is there a reason why you undid my revision concerning Matt Hardy's new song? The name "Woken" is simply speculation at the moment. It hasn't been officially released on iTunes, Spotify, or YouTube. And unlike all of the other songs on the Theme Song section, it lacks a source. Degenerich (talk) 11:32, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Music are not sourced if you look at all other songs/themes none are sourced TheKinkdomMan (talk) 19:50, 21 February 2018 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan (talk) 19:50, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose not all of the music is sourced but definitely some of them are. My issue is that there is currently no name to the song Matt Hardy is currently using and having one on the article is spreading false information. Degenerich (talk) 21:38, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It’s known to the universe as Ellen that’s all I know, and I know it’s not stated in any form TheKinkdomMan (talk) 02:58, 22 February 2018 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan (talk) 02:58, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Woken TheKinkdomMan (talk) 19:59, 9 March 2018 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan (talk) 19:59, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Andrew Jelks has been accepted

Andrew Jelks, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Theroadislong (talk) 19:59, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Riley McCarron has been accepted

Riley McCarron, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Theroadislong (talk) 20:00, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your username

Just to let you know, because I saw your signature, your username is User:TheKinkdomMan, not User:UserTheKinkdomMan. You should fix your signature to direct to the correct page. The page you created for User:UserTheKinkdomMan has been tagged for deletion under WP:U2. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:56, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How do I fix it UserTheKinkdomMan talk 23:59, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To fix your signature, simply go to your preferences page by clicking the "Preferences" link located on the very top-right corner of any page. Under the Signature section, take what you added to the "Signature:" line and replace it with the code below:

Signature fix code
[[User:TheKinkdomMan\|<span style="background-color: Black; color: DimGray">TheKinkdomMan</span>]] [[User talk:TheKinkdomMan\|talk]]

This should fix your signature so it'll point to the right places while keeping the color and formatting you customized. Let me know if you have any questions or if you need more help and I'll be happy to do so. Cheers! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:39, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It should be fixed now I believe TheKinkdomMan talk 08:02, 6 April 2018 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan talk 08:02, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now it should be fixed TheKinkdomMan talk 08:08, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I fixed the problem I’m not sure tho TheKinkdomMan talk 08:22, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I’m having some trouble TheKinkdomMan talk 08:49, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to read Rule_of_tincture (more detail in Heraldry#Tinctures). Design rules going back centuries with wisdom summarized in 1568 as metal should not be put on metal, nor colour on colour. Metals are Yellow and White, Colors are red, black, blue, green, and purple (and their varying shades). For your purposes, I'd suggest that what you want to do is metal letters on color: Gules, The KinkdomMan Argent. Then fiddle with shades of the colors in question. :-) Tarl N. (discuss) 03:47, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks I appreciate it TheKinkdomMan talk 05:21, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

You're signature is very hard on the eyes. It's hard to read. It's best to change the colours. See WP:COLOR for more information. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 08:07, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you I’m still trying to figure this all out TheKinkdomMan talk 17:08, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Having trouble again TheKinkdomMan talk TheKinkdomMan talk 21:07, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Need help TheKinkdomMan talk 21:22, 29 April 2018 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan talk 21:22, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see your signature is still hard to read. If you turn off whatever background or shadow you are using, it would be far easier to read.Dlohcierekim's sock User talk:Dlohcierekim 03:51, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps: TheKinkdomMan [[User:TheKinkdomMan|<span style="background-color:#000000; color: #d3d3d3">TheKinkdomMan</span>]] or
TheKinkdomMan [[User:TheKinkdomMan|<span style="background-color:#d3d3d3; color:#000000 ">TheKinkdomMan</span>]] ?--Auric talk 01:16, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps but currently right now I’m trying not to get blocked TheKinkdomMan talk 01:17, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User page

That's a nice user page, but have you noticed the error in the second user box? It says "Expression error" and it lists your user page at Category:ParserFunction errors. Rather than displaying an error, it might be an idea to replace  with a number. Johnuniq (talk) 05:43, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks i appreciate it I’ll edit it with my edit count, I know it says error but I use it as a joke but I’ll change it TheKinkdomMan talk 21:51, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

Well, go ahead. I reverted the edit almost instantly and it's been over 24 hours so I was allowed to revert anyway so good luck getting me banned I guess. I created a section on the talk page of The Elite but you haven't responded. Judester30 (talk) 17:58, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Judester30 - Yeah, no... that's not how it works. That's not at all how it works. You can be blocked for edit warring as soon as you start doing so (like what you've been doing just now actually). The three-revert rule is simply a bright-line rule; it draws a clear line in the sand and says that if you cross over this threshold, you're pretty much always within "blockable territory" for edit warring, and any such blocks applied for violating such are viewed upon as fair game. So please don't get into the false notion that "because your fourth revert was just a few hours outside of 24 hours" that it means you're safe from having policy enforced if it needs to be. This aside, I commend you highly for undoing your last edit to the article and choosing to discuss the dispute appropriately. It's not easy to do at times, but it's the right way to resolve our differences ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:05, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you wanna talk about The Elite let’s talk about it, you can say there inactive as a group because of YouTube, Youtube isn’t a source a reliable source is needed to provide the correct information for the stable, I didn’t report you because you want to talk about it, as I’m just signing in to Wikipedia, so let talk about it TheKinkdomMan talk 02:07, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Random creation of user talk pages

Please stop creating random user talk pages with variations of your username. This confuses editors as to what your username really is. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:59, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not creating them Ive been fixing my signature but I understand where it can be confusing TheKinkdomMan talk 00:19, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

re Jeff Hardy and the anonymous editor

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Dlohcierekim's sock User talk:Dlohcierekim 03:26, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please proceed to ANI and respond to my concerns there ASAP. If you fail to do so in a timely manner, you will be blocked indefinitely from editing, and you will have to negotiate a conditional unblock. Swarm ♠ 21:24, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have left a message on it and I’m leaving the Jeff Hardy alone and further more you can block me for this such thing I didn’t revert three times I did it twice I still have one more revert so don’t leave a threatening message on my talk page buddy TheKinkdomMan talk 00:44, 29 May 2018 (UTC) TheKinkdomMan talk 00:44, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I’m hoping you’ve managed to calm down a bit now? Might I suggest that you just keep replying at the ANI thread and not spread this discussion out over numerous user talk pages? Beeblebrox (talk) 02:52, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I will but I’m going to take some time off from editing and read up and learn from my mistakes, I’ve gotten pretty worked up for nothing I appreciate your help and anyone who is willing to help me out, I’m willing to learn TheKinkdomMan (talk) 02:56, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Followup

Hi, KinkdomMan. I've closed the thread at ANI, and rest assured that I am not going to block you. I just wanted you to know that you needed to respond there, but I do not want you to apologize profusely because you were afraid of a block. I want to make sure you actually understand the underlying issues. First, communication is required. When you revert, you have to explain why you're reverting, either on the person's talk page or in an edit summary. I advise you to get into the habit of using edit summaries for every edit, however minor. That is the easiest way of explaining an edit. Also, I just want you to understand that IPs are people too and you should treat them as you would any other editor. You should be willing to assume good faith when you see IPs editing, and if you want to revert an IP, consider whether the edit is obvious vandalism. If it is not, you owe them a good reason, because boldly making edits is encouraged as a matter of policy, and being unnecessarily harsh with IPs might result in you unintentionally driving away productive editors!

You seem willing and able to make these simple changes, and no one is going to be policing your editing with a block hanging over your head. I appreciate you as an editor and I am not trying to see you blocked. Continue editing as normal, just please keep these things in mind going forward. Okay? Oh, and if you have any questions about anything or need admin assistance for any reason, you can come to me at anytime. Swarm ♠ 04:26, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you swarm I wanna apologize for blowing up on you as well, yes I was scared of a block but I learned that I can edit like I own the Article and I really appreciate the advice your giving me, I got so use to editing without using a summary and that’s my mistake and I own up to it TheKinkdomMan talk 04:36, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

it’s not the end of the world

I’m sorry this seems to have upset you so much. The problem is that both of you were edit warring, and during the AN3 discussion you both attempted to explain away your actions and paint the other edit warrior as “the bad guy.” That is why I felt it necessary to issue these blocks.

Neither of you seem to get that there is no “good guy” in an edit war. By definition it takes a minimum of two people to edit war, and they are both in the wrong as edit warring is never the right thing to do. While there are a few exceptions, none of them would seem to apply in this case as the dispute was about the reliability of sources. So, if your responses at the thread had been to indicate that you knew you were edit warring, and that you now understood that you absolutely should not do so and would follow bold, revert, discuss in the future you almost certainly would not be blocked right now. I really didn’t want to, but I felt like neither of you gave me much choice. (cross posting to both of you) Beeblebrox (talk) 02:21, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I completely understand and I appreciate that you took the time to message me and gave me the option to learn from my mistake, and in the future there won’t be any edit wars TheKinkdomMan talk 18:25, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

😐

Yes he did Brock Lesner retierd from wrestling WWE anounnce it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickyjampr50 (talk • contribs) 01:37, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WWE did not announce it like I said you need to do research TheKinkdomMan talk 07:31, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

high school format

hey whats up, I see that you reverted one of my edits. I'm just changing the high school paramaters to the new format. Check the discussion here: high school format consensus -- Edday1051 (talk) 20:32, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New user page template

I noticed that you copied my userpage. I've seen a couple of newer users do the same, so I created User:NotTheFakeJTP/UPT. This helps simplify your userpage, making it easier to change and not as messy. Feel free to alter your page as necessary. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:58, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks I haven’t been on lately but I’ll definitely change it or you can change it if you want TheKinkdomMan talk 17:24, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

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

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

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

Individual reassessment

Matt Hardy, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 02:28, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pat McAfee, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NXT. 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) 06:16, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Problematic user

Hi TheKinkdomMan,

It seems you've had a hard time with a certain user at Bullet Club ([1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]).

I'm currently writing a report against one of them, who has been involved in too many edit wars, despite not having that many edits in mainspace.
However, I need support from other editors, otherwise administrators will not take the matter seriously.
Would you be interested in cooperating?
I would need you to review my current report and, if you agree with supporting it, add your signature to it.

Best, Walwal20 ^{talk ▾ contribs} 09:07, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I haven’t been on in a while (TheKinkdomMan talk 19:45, 17 November 2020 (UTC))[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:50, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ted Karras

stop reverting edits on Ted Karras, it's an official signing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OCBeeZilla (talk • contribs) 16:34, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It’s not official learn the rules of Wikipedia and learn how to sign TheKinkdomMan talk 16:35, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My badOCBeeZilla (talk) 16:42, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Signings

Since you seem to be mostly up-to-date with NFL free agency, just a reminder that even after 4PM ET, signings aren't "official" until teams announce them as such. Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:55, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I’m aware yes but I’ve been out of the game for awhile 😂 just coming back to Wikipedia however thank you for giving me more info TheKinkdomMan talk 19:59, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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) 00:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Paul Quessenberry for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paul Quessenberry 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/Paul Quessenberry 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.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:45, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How did that go, nominating a NFL player page for deletion 😂, got anything better to do TheKinkdomMan talk 08:41, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

George Karlaftis

Not sure exactly why you removed his number but the Chiefs confirmed he will be 56. Please research things like this before blindly removing it. Verify his number with this tweet.--Rockchalk7 17 05:13, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Same thing with Trent McDuffie.--Rockchalk7 17 05:14, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First off Twitter isn’t a source and a unsigned draft pick will not get his number right away TheKinkdomMan talk 11:54, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022

Your recent editing history at Jamie Collins (American football) 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.

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

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. Bluerules (talk) 12:44, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Bluerules (talk) 19:14, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.

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 ~~~~}}. RickinBaltimore (talk) 19:51, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I request a unblock [ping|RickinBaltimore] TheKinkdomMan talk 19:54, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Follow the steps at WP:GAB to request your unblock. RickinBaltimore (talk) 19:56, 14 May 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

I made threats which were wrong yes however allowing a harasser to get away with it isn’t right, I was defending myself and I admit fault to name calling and not being civil however at the end a couple hours ago was civil and asked them if we are done bitching and moaning at each other a peace offering to leave one another alone, here I will give my evidence [13] all i wanted was to be left alone and they kept coming at me I request to be unblocked as I will not engage with this user ever again TheKinkdomMan talk 20:07, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Already declined. Drmies (talk) 20:36, 14 May 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

I made threats which were wrong yes however allowing a harasser to get away with it isn’t right, I was defending myself and I admit fault to name calling and not being civil however at the end a couple hours ago was civil and asked them if we are done bitching and moaning at each other a peace offering to leave one another alone, here I will give my evidence [14] all i wanted was to be left alone and they kept coming at me I request to be unblocked as I will not engage with this user ever again TheKinkdomMan talk 20:07, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Already declined. Drmies (talk) 20:36, 14 May 2022 (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.

Unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

I made threats which were wrong yes however allowing a harasser to get away with it isn’t right, I was defending myself and I admit fault to name calling and not being civil however at the end a couple hours ago was civil and asked them if we are done bitching and moaning at each other a peace offering to leave one another alone, here I will give my evidence [15] all i wanted was to be left alone and they kept coming at me I request to be unblocked as I will not engage with this user ever again TheKinkdomMan talk 20:07, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No. This wasn't a bit of name calling. Drmies (talk) 20:36, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I shouldn’t be blocked for getting legal advice from the police, nor should I be blocked for defending myself it isn’t right and this person is getting away with harassment TheKinkdomMan talk 20:12, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you make three simultaneous requests?--CreecregofLife (talk) 20:19, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nerves because I’m trying to show I was harassed and left the user alone and I should be unblocked TheKinkdomMan talk 20:22, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just waiting on the appeal TheKinkdomMan talk 20:29, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a new account isn’t hard but I will go through the appeal process and since this isn’t a fair case for either side I shouldn’t be the only one punished TheKinkdomMan talk 20:47, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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).

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

Request reason:

I was harassed and stood up for myself name calling and more was involved I admit fault and want to make it right, I’m willing to apologize to the other party however taking legal action can be used since I was harassed online (Cyber Bullying) as I asked the user multiple times to please leave me alone, neither of us were in the right and I certainty wasn’t in the right, I made threats, name calling and Legal threats which was absolutely wrong and I admit fault however I was standing up for myself and we were civil and mended our fight however the user took upon themselves to report me after we were discussing what we disagreed with, that is not fair or right and I request to be unblocked or temporarily blocked with a time frame, as I was wrong 100% to make all those claims and assumptions and I want to make things right TheKinkdomMan talk 20:44, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Essentially a duplicate request of UTRS appeal #58359 which is, obviously, declined. See also WP:GAB. Only your actions are relevant here. Yamla (talk) 21:20, 14 May 2022 (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.

They said if I retract my legal action I can be unlocked and I retract it TheKinkdomMan talk 21:23, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

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

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

Request reason:

I made legal threats and I was wrong to do that I was wrong to make any sort of threats and I take them back, I was told if I retract my statements I could be unblocked and I retract my statements and want to apologize for my wrong doing I was in the wrong and I deeply regret it TheKinkdomMan talk 21:39, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Despite the fact that you evince absolutely no understanding, despite massive atempts to educate you, of how to resolve disputes on Wikipedia, you have withdrawn the legal threat, and that was the reason for the block. I share @Nil Einne:'s concerns and thank them for their efforts. To put this in simple terms, if you insult, berate, attack in any way, or harass other users, you may be reblocked without further warning. If another editor's behavior is unacceptable, please do not respond in kind. Please report at WP:ANI or seek help from other users. I hope for the best. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:33, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While you have withdrawn the legal threat, there are the unaddressed issues of personal attacks and harassment. I'm disinclined to unblock you to continue those. Also, you said you already called the police, How do you uncall the police? --Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:57, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ANI thread for context. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:05, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I called the police for advice not to report anything and I can promise you that I will not talk to this user or message or threaten them again or anyone TheKinkdomMan talk 23:07, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deepfriedokra TheKinkdomMan talk 23:08, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Explain “ taking legal action can be used since I was harassed online (Cyber Bullying)” and whether you have developed any new thoughts on the matter. Drmies (talk) 23:13, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They gave me advice to follow up with a lawyer first and I’m not willing to pay a lawyer and I don’t think it’s necessary to involve a lawyer when in fact all I want to do is apologize to the person I was engaged with a edit war with and I want to edit more and not be careless and stupid the way I was when I handled myself earlier, obviously I Fd up I made the wrong choice of handling this situation we both did, as I know I can’t threaten anyone or condone my behavior I would like the opportunity to correct my wrongs and make things right, it wasn’t fair of me to fight with Bluerules| I am sorry for my behavior and my words and I am sorry for making the dumbest decision and letting my emotions get the better of me on here when I should of just logged off and stopped going back and fourth I know that now, but it’s never too late to fix a mistake but I never made a report I only asked for advise I said I made a report to get them to leave me alone which was absolutely wrong and not something I’m proud of I’m deeply embarrassed and ashamed of my behavior and I am sorry to the admins and the message board for my poor behavior, I have nothing to say but ask for a second chance to make things right please Deepfriedorka and Bluerules TheKinkdomMan talk 23:15, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I have developed new thoughts, there is no legal course to take over a argument I was absolutely 100% in the wrong and BlueRules wasn’t I was the instigator and stupid one for saying foolish things I do not condone my actions and, now let me explain my choice of words, I said cyber bullying cause I felt like they weren’t listening to my side I used the word incorrectly and stupidly at no point did they cyber bully me I was wrong for saying it but they were wrong for harassing we both were more me than him, it’s my fault and my actions that led to him feeling the need to report me and I regret it TheKinkdomMan talk 23:19, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth as the blocking admin, if an admin reviewing these requests feels an unblock is warranted I will not oppose. That being said, TheKinkdomMan, when things get that escalated, walk away from the debate for a while. It's a content dispute on Wikipedia. It's not THAT important. RickinBaltimore (talk) 23:23, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

drimes at no point was I in the right and I was wrong for threatening them, I honestly want to be unblocked to apologize to them personally and on the message board for everyone to see, I have no basis for my actions but to say I was wrong and I admit 100% of fault for causing this BS, but at no point did I file a report with the police I only called asking for advice and they said and I quote that cyber bullying would consist of name calling constant torture of someone or persons etc……… I am 100% wrong and I’m deeply sorry for my actions and my behavior at no point should anyone have to deal with that TheKinkdomMan talk 23:24, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rickinbaltimore thank you for teaching me a lesson, I do deeply regret my actions taken today TheKinkdomMan talk 23:25, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As I hope to be unblocked all i can ask is for the opportunity to apologize to BlueRules and on the message board where it started, this is my goal to take responsibility for my actions taken today, please allow me to apologize to them and on the message board it’s something I need to do and I don’t want to create a new account to apologize I want to man up and take responsibility TheKinkdomMan talk 23:29, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from not making legal threats, what else would you have done differently?—Bagumba (talk) 02:22, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. This is the crux of the matter. Disagreement and even conflict are inevitable on a project of this scope. What does one do other than insult, harangue, threaten, bluster, etc? Please read WP:CIVIL, WP:DR, and WP:NPA, and relate them to how you will handle disagreements in the future. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:29, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's concerning to me that it seems to me you are ~~not calling a lawyer~~ withdrawing your legal threat because you don't want to spend the money. This is the wrong reason. Oh, please read WP:NLT and tell me why legal threats are wrong other than getting blocked as a consequence or not being willing to spend money on a lawyer. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:33, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To me, it shows a lack of remorse CreecregofLife (talk) 06:09, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not interested in remorse. Merely an assurance that the editor will know how to disagree w/o becoming disagreeable. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 06:49, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I note that this user suggests that they will just create a new account above("Creating a new account isn’t hard"); TheKinkdomMan, the block is on you as a person, not just this account, you may not edit under any account or IP address until this block is removed. Creating a new account is block evasion and will only make it harder for you to be unblocked. 331dot (talk) 07:10, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well for one if I got the chance to do it over I’d move on and leave the edit war alone and separate myself from the situation TheKinkdomMan talk 10:57, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’m the future I’d ask the user there opinion and say mine and come to a conclusion if we can’t agree I’d move on without any war or drama TheKinkdomMan talk 10:59, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can assure you and anyone I’m not gonna create a new account or have a edit war I was just making a point that I wanted the chance to apologize to the user that I made threats too and I do have remorse towards my actions and my behavior I regret my actions taken, however if I had the chance to do it over again I’d move on from the dispute and carry on with my life and edits and not engage TheKinkdomMan talk 11:01, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

331dot, Deepfriedokra, {{U|Bagumba}, RickinBaltimore, we're dealing with an editor here who edits rasslin' articles, writes stream-of-consciousness unblock request without paragraphing or spellchecking. They misspell my name and that of Deepfriedokra; in the most important thread of their Wikipedia career they do not have the capacity to self-reflect and realize that we are a community of writers here. So how much reflection upon the nature of legal threats do we expect? I don't even believe the whole cock and bull story of going to the cops--they talked themselves into a corner and can't easily jump out. It is what it is: this editor is not going to be more aware of others and of their collaborative environment because we want them to. If their edits are worth something, unblock them. Drmies (talk) 14:27, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Let's take what we can get. Endorse unblock Defer to @RickinBaltimore: ultimately. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:58, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
See what I said earlier. I'm fine with that, as I said to them before as well, just remember if you are in a content dispute, walk away for a bit. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:59, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware I miss spell a lot however I am using my phone, and that’s no excuse my apologies for my pronunciation, I can assure everyone here I am not going to have another issue like this and yes I backed myself in a corner and it’s no excuse, I regret my actions I regret what I did, I have no intention to go through this or put anyone in internet help again I want to make things right not just for me but for the person I did wrong, it doesn’t sit well in my stomach for what I did, I did not make a report with my local police I did call asking for advise but I’m also not willing to hire a lawyer or put anyone through hell over something that is frivolous, I 100% am at fault for this BS I am remorseful and ashamed, I regret yesterday and most of all I regret being a asshole over the NFL body structure, I have no right to enforce the structure and no right to ignore other editors and people who contribute here, on edit wars I defiantly learned a lesson, just move on before this happens and make stupid decisions, I was and am at fault for starting a edit war, I have no excuse but I can say I’m deeply sorry for my choice of words for name calling, for being a keyboard warrior and most of all a unfriendly editor with a agenda. All I can say is thank you for letting me explain and learn from my mistake and hope for redemption because I do want to continue writing on here I do want to message BlueRules and apologize and I do want to go on the message board where it started and admit fault and apologize for all the inconvenience I have caused, I know my editing sucks I know my writing skills aren’t what they used to be but I also know I am human and we make mistakes which isn’t a excuse for what I did, BlueRules wasn’t at fault but just reacting to me being a dick, if you guys give me the chance to be unblocked I guarantee I will not break any rules again and to stay away from edit wars and being a asshole, I honestly wish I could take yesterday back but I can’t, I just want the chance to do something right here and apologize and move forward TheKinkdomMan talk 16:25, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can honestly say I want to move on and carry forward editing but I do want to avoid all conflicts from here on out, I don’t want to go through this again, it’s not worth it TheKinkdomMan talk 16:36, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Drimes I am aware of other editors I am aware of the mistake I made, I am aware that my actions lead to consequences, however I regret everything I said and did yesterday I regret my Actions I regret not listening to the other editor, emotions can run high and get the better of people as it did me, I am guilty of pulling the trigger with my typing fingers and saying stupid shit, however you can mot say I’m not aware of things, because I am, I am remorseful and ashamed. I have no excuse for what I did because it was my actions that led to this if I could do it over again I would certainly have walked away, I did ask the other editor to leave me alone and when they stopped talking to me I let it go, this was behind me so I thought and then we were having a discussion on Jamie Collins talk page, they got mad and reported me again, should I have apologized and moved on right away yes I should have, I should have also just let them have the last word but I didn’t, so don’t you dare say I’m not aware of things. All I want to do here is edit pages and apologize for my actions and move on, when I said it was easy to make another account I was angry but I will not make another account I will not get into another war like this again I will not go through this BS when I can easily walk away carry on, I know I didn’t before but that doesn’t mean I’m not willing to do the right thing if given the opportunity. I am not perfect but I’m willing to own up to my mistake and ask kindly and nicely to be unblocked to make things right I owe it to myself and BlueRules and everyone from yesterday. The ball is in your court and the person who is willing to let me make things right TheKinkdomMan talk 16:55, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Look guys I made a mistake, I’ve said this multiple times, I can’t change what I did, I can’t change the past but what I can do is move forward and do better next time, I rather edit and move forward than be blocked and feeling angry, all I want to do is apologize to the other editor and the message board, I don’t want anymore conflict or wars next time a situation comes up I’m walking away, it’s that simple no drama equals no BS TheKinkdomMan talk 18:11, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’m inclined to say I don’t want to pursue legal action do to the fact it’s not worth the time and effort or money, even if the other party isn’t entirely blameless I just don’t see a reason for it, not to mention I just want to put this behind me and apologize and move forward editing things I don’t care about what caused the issue, the issue is over and done with and frankly I don’t have the time to argue with them when I can just walk away and move on with my life, no one is perfect and I certainly am one to admit I was wrong to make a legal threat and name calling, but i was also provoked but that’s besides the point the point is I want absolutely nothing to do with drama on here anymore, it’s a waste of time to argue over something so stupid and getting angry, I am sorry I am ashamed of my actions but again when I’m provoked I don’t keep quiet I will defend myself but I will do better next time by ignoring it and walking away and not causing this drama TheKinkdomMan talk 21:17, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say, you continually saying that pursing legal action is not worth the time and effort or money isn't particularly reassuring. There are far better reason not to pursue legal action, especially on something so mundane. And in any case when someone is considering legal action I'd hope the other party cannot be entirely blameless in the eyes of the person considering the legal action. If someone considers legal action when they know the other party is entirely blameless, frankly that isn't someone who should ever edit Wikipedia no matter what re-assurances they give. Also sometimes when something is "besides the point", it's best not bring it up, and this seems to be one of those cases. While walking away from a dispute can be good solution especially it's getting too heavy for you to handle without lashing out or if it's a dispute which doesn't really matter, AFAIK no one has said you cannot defend yourself within reason. The problem is not so much that you didn't keep quiet but the way you defended yourself was completely inappropriate which included legal threats but also personal attacks and harassment. And so while walking away from a dispute is something many editors probably including me, should do more often or quicker, the collaborative nature of Wikipedia means that often it is necessary to discuss a dispute. So your ability to discuss a dispute without doing all the bad stuff you did is important when editing here. Remember that it doesn't have to be an either walk away forever or discuss the dispute. A mistake many editors make, and this definitely includes me is to reply when they are still angry or annoyed over something that happened or that they read. Instead you should leave the dispute for a while often even days is fine, and give yourself a chance to calm down, only replying when you don't find yourself very angry or getting worked up. This seems to be what RickinBaltimore was suggesting above rather than walking away completely. Some editors may find it helpful to write out a reply early on but not submit it, keeping it on their device somewhere. They can then edit it or simply discard it entirely and start afresh when they've calmed down (reading it or going by memory). Although for others, this may not be successful since doing do may just get them more worked up or maybe re-reading it when they've calmed down will get them worked up again. Ultimately you need to find what works for you and it needs to be something which avoids you doing all the stuff that lead up to you being blocked and it does not matter that other editor may have done some wrong too. Nil Einne (talk) 23:10, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are 100% correct I was angry when I typed back when I made the mistake of legal threats, I didn’t walk away when I should have when I did it was already too late I made the mistake of saying things when I was angry, it got the better of me, my behavior was unacceptable it was inappropriate and wrong, from this block I have learned to judge the situation better, really all I want to do is apologize and be a better editor, I have no excuse for my actions and words but I do regret it Nil Einne if I had the opportunity to do it over I would have left my messages on edit and walked away and cooled down, I really want the opportunity to fix this I don’t want to end my Wikipedia career like this I want to be a better human being too, I can guarantee this won’t happen again with anyone. TheKinkdomMan talk 23:17, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While I’m still unable to edit right now I will listen to all the advice that was given to me, I have no plans to insult attack or belittle anyone I swear I will not attack or make a dumb mistake again TheKinkdomMan talk 15:56, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When will I have full access back TheKinkdomMan talk 16:57, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind I have access now, thank you everyone who helped and taught me a valuable lesson TheKinkdomMan talk 17:36, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Hayden Christensen, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 03:29, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First off IMDB cited so don’t start TheKinkdomMan talk 14:32, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:IMDB — SirDot (talk) 14:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]