User talk:ChallengeCick

October 2021

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Chris McCandless have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Chris McCandless was changed by ChallengeCick (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.930438 on 2021-10-05T09:22:42+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 09:22, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Size changes

Please avoid making edits like these [1][2][3][4][5][6]. Images should not have arbitrary fixed sizes. Wikipedia allows individual users to set their preferred thumbnail sizes; fixing them within an article overwrites these settings. The sizes you entered were also way larger than the Wikimedia default and gave the articles a crammed appearance. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 08:50, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@IceWelder: - Are you sure they're larger? Some of the defaults were over 1000px. And I lowered them to a reasonable 300px. I think you should recheck. ChallengeCick (talk) 08:50, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Check your settings under Preferences->Appearance->Files->Thumbnail size or any browser extensions you might have. The Wikimedia default is 220px and renders as such for everyone not logged in or using default settings. IceWelder [✉] 09:51, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It works. Thanks. ChallengeCick (talk) 09:55, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nintendo Switch Online banner.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Nintendo Switch Online banner.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Masem (t) 12:35, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Kirby and the Forgotten Land.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:49, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Nintendo Switch Online banner.png

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:36, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm HMSLavender. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Fall Guys, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. lavender|^{(formerly HMSSolent)}|lambast 08:53, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Survivor Series (2021) poster.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Survivor Series (2021) poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:39, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Hedgehogs in speed

A tag has been placed on Hedgehogs in speed requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

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 deleted 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. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 23:28, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Survivor Series (2021) banner.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Survivor Series (2021) banner.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:28, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Bryan Danielson September 2021 (crop).jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Bryan Danielson September 2021 (crop).jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 12:44, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:VinceMcMahon.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:VinceMcMahon.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 19:35, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"WrestleMania XXXVI" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect WrestleMania XXXVI. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 21#WrestleMania XXXVI until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:05, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:WWE Day 1 banner.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WWE Day 1 banner.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:06, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Royal Rumble (2022) banner.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Royal Rumble (2022) banner.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:31, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:WrestleMania Backlash (2022) poster.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WrestleMania Backlash (2022) poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:47, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:MarioKart8Deluxe.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:MarioKart8Deluxe.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 08:40, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 2022

Hello, I'm Some Dude From North Carolina. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. STOP making new files when updating a poster. You can simply upload the newer version under the same file by clicking "Upload a new version of this file". Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 23:04, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Sonic the Hedgehog 2 (film). Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be 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 noticeboards.
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. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 22:09, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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 noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Mario Kart 8, you may be blocked from editing. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:16, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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 noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Most or all the edits I’ve seen from you are junk. You’re spamming non-free images, WP:OR, junk edits, breaking rules, and goading other users. Stop editing until you read policy and have the slightest idea what an encyclopedia and a public project are. This one, particularly. Users can be blocked for this. — Smuckola (talk) 12:28, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:MarioKart8Deluxe.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MarioKart8Deluxe.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:49, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Sonic the Hedgehog 2 final poster.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sonic the Hedgehog 2 final poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:31, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Sonic the Hedgehog 2 final poster.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Sonic the Hedgehog 2 final poster.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Wikipedia having the same file format, and all inward links have been updated.

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 deleted 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. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:10, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:WrestleMania 38 banner.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WrestleMania 38 banner.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:29, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing

Hello there. I know it can take some time to learn the ins and outs of Wikipedia...but it really is alarming how many warnings you have related to images on your talk page. Continuing this trajectory will likely end up with your account getting blocked from editing, so I recommend slowing down and doing some more learning on things.

There's WP:IUP for image help. You seem to make a lot of edits related to video games and movies too, so it may be good to familiarize yourself with things like MOS:VG and MOS:FILM too. But please do something to change. People like myself are getting tired of telling you the basics, like "Only one box art per article" that I see yet another editor has warned you about. Sergecross73 msg me 17:17, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, just making sure you saw this, because the edits you just made are exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about here. You uploaded new versions of images for Super Mario articles that already had perfectly acceptable images, and then changed them to a non-standard size. Unnecessary and actually making it worse. Final warning on this. Sergecross73 msg me 20:00, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73 and Primefac: Did you see the stack of final warnings about edit warring? I missed those in the ocean of violations. Can you please complete the full indef? He thinks this is a smack talking copyright-proof fan site. Almost all edit history has been reverted and the rest is junk about junk subjects. WP:NOTHERE — Smuckola (talk) 21:48, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the image they uploaded for SM3DW (Super Mario 3D World) and that is completely unacceptable. You should not be uploading higher quality version of non-free images. They are a lower quality for a reason. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:05, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've now reverted their upload of the SM3DW + Bowser's Fury box art and requested rev del of the older versions of both files. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:13, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73 and Primefac: Contrary to warnings, this user still will not stop the WP:OR WP:RS, and citing himself in edit summaries. Now he's pretending to rename an album.[7][8] The user will not respond to anything but force. WP:ICANTHEARYOU WP:NOTHERE. You guys never had any reason not to do a full block. — Smuckola (talk) 21:16, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree he needs to cite his sources...but I just looked it up on Apple Music and it appears he's not wrong. He needs to start using sources immediately...but it seems harsh to indef him over this when sourcing wasn't really what I gave him his final warning for. I won't oppose Primefac if they think otherwise though. But to me, feels like final warning time for yet another thing. ChallengeCick, you need to learn WP:V and WP:REFB if you have any hope to keep editing on Wikipedia. Sergecross73 msg me 21:41, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a little bit busy today, but I'll definitely check it out. I understand if you want to stop me from uploading files, but not forever. Plus, this is the first time it's happened to me, so at least bite in to give me another chance. You said it yourself that it seems a bit harsh for an indef block. Plus, I always cite my sources. Sometimes they may not be legitimate, but they're still sources where there could be proof. Anyways, just consider it. ChallengeCick (talk) 03:36, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Citing your sources doesn't meant writing "I saw it on Spotify" in an edit summary. Please read WP:REFB for what it means. It's no rush if you're busy, but it is very important that you read and understand it before adding any further content to Wikipedia. If you keep going around doing it wrong while ignoring these comments, then you're going to find yourself in the same place you currently find yourself with file uploads. Sergecross73 msg me 03:45, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain namespaces (File) for continuing to upload invalid and non-free images larger than allowed.

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 ~~~~}}. Primefac (talk) 21:17, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reasonings for unblocking

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).

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

Request reason:

I was unaware of how to upload non-free files to wikipedia. I didn't know the correct way used for image compression. I didn't know any of that stuff. But I'm doing my research on how to get it right. As for editing, I may have editing disruptively in. some articles. Mario Kart 8 is a good example of this. I promise to change all of this if unblocked. If there is another reasoning for my blocking. Please let me know on my talk page

Decline reason:

You've failed to convince me that you understand exactly why you were blocked from uploading files. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:43, 25 February 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.

You completely ignored my last chance warnings above, and continued to do the same things that got you the warnings in the first place. You're honestly lucky to only be blocked from images. I was one step away from blocking you from all editing. Sergecross73 msg me 20:49, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. IT shows that you didn't read your talk page until you were partially blocked since WP:IUP details on what you do with non-free images, and uploading higher quality versions is the exact opposite of what you should do (Unless that's the first version of the file). For example, with File:Brilliant Diamond Pokémon Battle.jpg which I uploaded, it started out with a high quality version (the base quality of the Nintendo Switch), and a bot tagged it to be reduced in size, which that happened and the previous revision was tagged for rev del. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:04, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Although interestingly I just noticed that while the image size/resolution was reduced, somehow the file size was increased which I don't understand how that works. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73 and Ohnoitsjamie: He. Just. Won't. Stop. And he can't stop, and he don't stop, and ya can't stop da block. — Smuckola (talk) 20:21, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hold. On. There. Fella. I get blocking me again for that but I was just too nervous about the Sonic 2 poster looking good on the inbox which I still don't understand why. No joke I thought about it yesterday and I knew this was gonna happen. But now, we have our final poster, and this parade is officially over. I will keep that poster in my downloads folder for as long as I have this computer. You can unblock me from image uploading, and we'll all be at peace. I dunno about you but to me, that sounds like peace calling from miles away. ChallengeCick (talk) 05:21, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your reason to unblock amounts to "I was going to keep messing with this copyrighted image until it was exactly what I wanted." How do we know you won't do this again with another game, movie, or whatnot where the box art isn't up to your standards? --ThomasO1989 (talk) 19:13, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. "i knew better, knew it would be undone in all futility, but I refused to not do it, and again refused to undo it later, to prevent being inevitably blocked" — Smuckola (talk) 21:04, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's an easy answer my friend. I don't know how you guys actually reduce the size of a non-free image. Instead of having a bot do it for me, for once I'd like to know how do I do it myself. Maybe then I wouldn't just say "oh well I don't know how they actually reduce the size of their files, so might as well just upload this high quality version instead." ChallengeCick (talk) 05:11, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Sonic the Hedgehog 2 final poster.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sonic the Hedgehog 2 final poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:39, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Sonic the Hedgehog 2 final poster.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sonic the Hedgehog 2 final poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Fastlne (2021)

A tag has been placed on Fastlne (2021) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

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 deleted 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. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:50, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to The Beatles, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Your recent bold edit has been reverted. Per the bold, revert, discuss cycle, after a bold edit is reverted, the status quo should remain while a discussion is started instead of edit-warring, and the dispute should be resolved before reinstating the edit, after a needed consensus is formed to keep it or an alternate version. Mutt Lunker (talk) 09:53, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Sir John Lennon

A tag has been placed on Sir John Lennon requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

John Lennon was never knighted

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

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 deleted 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. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 10:51, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Cody Rhoades

A tag has been placed on Cody Rhoades requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Unnecessary redirect

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

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 deleted 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. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 10:58, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Peacock Video

A tag has been placed on Peacock Video requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Unnecessary redirect

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

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 deleted 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. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 10:59, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Freakin

Please stop italicising the "Freakin" bit of Seth's name. Not only is it not in our MOS but WWE don't even officially do it. What appears in the lower card is an aesthetic flair which we don't include for the same reasons we don't change every instance of reDRagon to red the way AEW do in their card. — Czello 08:35, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then. But besides WWE's website, they always do the italicising for the "freakin" part like whenever they have a graphic of Seth's name on Raw. So that's why I always did it that way. However, that doesn't change there fact that I want them to stop using and just call him Seth Rollins again. ChallengeCick (talk) 08:44, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Beatles (album)

Both "self-titled" and "eponymous" are redundant, which is bad writing style. Anyone who can read can see that it is self-titled. Two editors have now reverted you. Per WP:BRD, please do not revert again without consensus. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 23:01, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If it's a bad editing style, then why not remove from all the self-titled albums out there, otherwise even though the white album is it's nickname, it's original name is The Beatles. Which is the same name as the band. Coincidence? ChallengeCick (talk) 15:31, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Music studios and artists can name their albums any way they wish. They don't have to follow anyone's guidelines about good or bad writing style. They can name an album "Da Beedles" if they wish. That's none of Wikipedia's business, nor ours as editors, and Wikipedia has no control over what studios or artists do. We don't tell them what to do; we just report what they do. Wikipedia's stylistic guidelines are independent of studios and artists. With any encyclopedia that has professional editorial oversight, such as Britannica, your edit never would have gotten through in the first place because it's such poor writing. None of this is a general criticism of your contributions to Wikipedia. But none of us is perfect, and a general rule on Wikipedia is that if we don't want our edits challenged and corrected, we shouldn't edit. The bottom line here: Don't use "self-titled" or "eponymous" for any album in which both artist and album are named in the sentence, unless you get consensus on the article's talk page. There are some situation in which "eponymous" or "self-titled" is appropriate. For example, in an article about a band rather than a specific album a sentence later in the article might be: "Less than a year before their breakup, the group released an eponymous album, their only double album." In that sentence the album itself is not named but denoted by the word "eponymous". That's acceptable. Again, read WP:BRD. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 16:44, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022

Please do not add or change content, as you did at The Dark Side of the Moon, 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. Tkbrett (✉) 11:16, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Kickstart My Heart. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 13:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, 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 noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at The Dark Side of the Moon, you may be blocked from editing. JG66 (talk) 15:16, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by disrupt Wikipedia? Is a false edit on a wiki page on one of the greatest albums of all time really that bad? ChallengeCick (talk) 16:49, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit, what makes you think that anything like "But the album was supposed to be listened, as an album. And it is." and "Woahness" is appropriate for an encyclopedia? As ValarianB said in his revert summary, Wikipedia isn't your personal blog. Assuming you're not a troll and given all your edits to this article were reverted, it's best to stay away from that article. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 17:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is clear that User:ChallengeCick fails WP:CIR and is WP:NOTHERE with edits like these – [9], [10] – despite the repeated warnings. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 19:12, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning

In your time here, virtually every edit you've made is undone. I know it takes time to learn the website, but a lot if your edits are simply bad judgment calls. There's absolutely no reason to think that adding personal commentary like "Whoaness" was appropriate to add to an article. And your refusal to stop making so many bad image contributions has gotten you blocked from the entire area of editing.

Are you going to take this seriously or not? Because I'm about one step away from blocking your account from all editing. You need to get a clue and get it together. Either decide to take this seriously or stop editing. Sergecross73 msg me 17:50, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow do I have a lot to go over what you said. All right let's do this.

"virtually every edit you've made is undone." are you trying to say that every edit has been edited? if that's the case well that can go for everybody including you. Pages change. They always get edited. Every wikipedia page has been edited. In terms of the Woahness comment, I won't argue with you there. That was totally wrong of me.

"And your refusal to stop making so many bad image contributions has gotten you blocked from the entire area of editing." I sent you and Primefac tons of messages about how that situation is fixed and you still don't believe me.

"Are you going to take this seriously or not? Because I'm about one step away from blocking your account from all editing. You need to get a clue and get it together. Either decide to take this seriously or stop editing." I'm actually taking this seriously if you didn't notice. And why are you gonna block me from editing completely? Is it because I'm not editing everyday, or I'm not making massive changes often, or I'm making new articles rarely? What are you trying to say to me here?

In conclusion, you basically are one step away from blocking me due to rare wrong edits and not "taking it seriously". You need to give me some proper clarification because after everything I went though, I'm not sure how to feel right about now. ChallengeCick (talk) 14:15, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't just mean that your every edit is just altered, I'm saying most are immediately and completely undone. And I, and others, have asked you specific questions already, that you have failed to acknowledge. How do you reconcile your supposed stance of "taking things seriously" by writing things like "Whoaness" in an encyclopedia? That's not even a real word. How is that taking things seriously? I want to know thr thought process behind that edit. Sergecross73 msg me 17:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, yes, I've seen your comments about your past issues with images use, but considering how you've still found ways to repeatedly make disruptive image edits, , despite being told not to, I consider that to still be an issue as well. Sergecross73 msg me 17:28, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't why the hell you guys are going crazy for the Woahness edit but it is what it is. I basically heard that word along with some other stuff in a really well made Pink Floyd retrospective which obviously The Dark Side of the Moon and it's legacy and they included the word Woahness. So there, and as far as my edits being undone immediately, I remember how long my edits last and I can confidently, about 20% of all my edits have been undone immediately after. So there's my thought process on those things. Also, your example on me still disrupting image edits is irrelevant I'm sorry. ChallengeCick (talk) 17:30, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just that your edits are mostly undone, it's that you frequently engage in edit wars over your contested edits and fail to engage other users on the article's talk page. You've done it on Mario Kart 8, WrestleMania articles, The Dark Side of the Moon, Beatles articles... You don't think to ever just drop it. This, along with your comment "the disrupting images bit is irrelevant" just screams "I didn't hear that". Either learn to listen to other editors or stop editing. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 17:40, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's a rather poor approximation of how many of your edits have been undone. All you have to do is look at your list of contributions and see how many are tagged as "reverted". That means someone undid your entire edit. It says "reverted" a lot, and many times when it doesn't, it's because you were talking on a talk page rather than editing an article.

I'm going to be honest with you - if you can't even begin to understand what these probables are, it probably means you're not ready to be writing an encyclopedia. I'm going to give you a last chance, but I highly recommend you take this chance to spending time reading help pages and policies. If you just go off and start tweaking image sizes or add weird personal commentary on articles, you'll be blocked. Sergecross73 msg me 18:29, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking about it, the best thing you can do, ChallengeCick, is that if you do make an edit and someone reverts you, do not revert it back, even if you think you are right. If you really want that edit in, then engage with the user that did it and discuss it with them and learn why they did it. But, if you ignore this advice and engage in any new edit war, then I'd say that settles it and you're not ready for Wikipedia. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 21:28, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since when did you see me getting to an edit war besides the Mario Kart 8 situation? And I have engaged, many times before. Don't tell me I don't know what I'm doing cause I definitely know. ChallengeCick (talk) 05:10, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For example, here, you changed images to a non-standard size twice, without edit summary or explanation, despite being told not to. I asked you about it yesterday and you still haven't responded. That's not engaging in discussion properly. It's that sort of thing you need to change. Sergecross73 msg me 11:49, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bro I legit told you that the Woahness comment was wrong of me didn't you see it? As for reading policies and stuff, I don't need to read them as I'm not doing something wrong every single time I edit on wikipedia. If my edit gets reverted on wikipedia, most of the time it's because the main editors of the page aren't too accepting of my improvements on the page. Is there something I missed? ChallengeCick (talk) 18:34, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you even read my last response? I asked you about your repeated altering of image sizes at Kickstart my Heart. Sergecross73 msg me 19:05, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh right. About Kickstart My Heart (my god what a banging song) and the image situation. It just didn't look right to me. It looked out of proportion and it still kinda does so I thought it was my job to align everything perfectly and it got reverted immediately. Thanks. ChallengeCick (talk) 19:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but that's the thing I'm talking about. You need to engage in discussion with those people and explain your actions with them. That's the sort of "engaging in discussion" you need to be participating in. Not just repeatedly reverting without explanation. Especially since you were in the wrong here. Infobox images are a set size that shouldn't be altered. This particular issue is done with, but you need to be doing that in future disputes. Sergecross73 msg me 20:57, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your "when did you see me getting to an edit war besides the Mario Kart 8 situation" I literally gave you a list of articles above you edit warred in: You've done it on Mario Kart 8, WrestleMania articles, The Dark Side of the Moon, Beatles articles... are you simply not reading our responses? --ThomasO1989 (talk) 17:08, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am reading bro. But are you seeing me doing that today I stopped with all those articles because good reason was given. You're lucky you're even getting this response from me as I'm currently revising for the biggest test of my life tomorrow! ChallengeCick (talk) 13:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're responses are awful, and instill no confidence that you understand the problems here. No one is "lucky" to have read them - you're lucky you're not blocked. I'm not responding further, as these discussions are going nowhere. Any more violations or disruptive edits and your account is blocked. Sergecross73 msg me 13:47, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In two separate unrelated cases, you have, without any explanation or reason given, taken a list of items in alphabetical order, and re-ordered them into an indiscernible order. Why? What are you doing? Sergecross73 msg me 14:23, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because I think (and this is just my mentality) more famous people or more famous things, need to be on the top. Like how Michael Jackson is about the singer we all know and love. For the different Michael Jackson you go to the disambiguation. See what I mean. ChallengeCick (talk) 00:27, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Use edit summaries to convey things like this.
Stop using subjective measures like that - it just leads to disputes over people's personal opinions. Use objective measures, like alphabetical or chronological order. Sergecross73 msg me 12:47, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Please Please Me, you may be blocked from editing. Tkbrett (✉) 13:57, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at The Beatles. Tkbrett (✉) 14:51, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

These edits finally pushes things over the line. I can't believe that, despite all these warnings and blocks, that you'd still managed to repeatedly make such a bad edit in relation to images yet again. In reviewing your recent edits, it's clear that the only thing that had changed was that I temporarily stopped watching over your edits. Far too many of your edits are undone immediately due to being unnecessary or ill-conceived. There's no way around it - you are not ready to be editing Wikipedia. You are blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia. Sergecross73 msg me 18:00, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Look dude, if that's not how you put your templates together, fine. That doesn't mean you have to underestimate all the good stuff I've done in my time here. ChallengeCick (talk) 10:15, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I assure you, that was factored into the decision as well. Sergecross73 msg me 10:44, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

what do you mean? ChallengeCick (talk) 19:24, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:WrestleMania 39 banner.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WrestleMania 39 banner.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:45, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reason for Unblocking

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).

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

Request reason:

In terms of the Magical Mystery Tour edit I did, I understand, that was a terrible edit and incredibly stupid on my part. There have been 2 or 3 other beetles album articles that show alternate covers and they were never displayed this way. So I let my stupidity, blindness and cockiness get in my way and I'll never do it again. And as far as the permanent block from uploading files, I think it's time to lift it as I think this was more than enough time for see to learn the rules about file uploading and what is and isn't permitted. I hope my reasons make sense and please keep in mind that all these promises will into affect immediately after the blocked is lifted.

Decline reason:

Your unblock request does not adequately address the reason for your block. My suggestion is that you take the standard offer and re-apply in 6 months time. PhilKnight (talk) 11:25, 19 July 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.

ChallengeCick (talk) 10:56, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just indefinitely blocked you from all editing, the final straw being very bad edits related to altering image sizes, and you have the nerve to suggest that it's time to lift your image uploading block now? Seriously? That makes zero sense. A big part of your block is your continued bad judgement when it comes to images. It was upgraded to a full website block because the image block wasn't enough to stop you from making bad edits. This is showing a stunning lack of understanding of the issues here. Sergecross73 msg me 20:20, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When you were first unblocked for the unnecessary image uploads, you claimed that you didn't understand the rules, despite the multitude of warnings telling you to stop. When you were unblocked, you immediately went back to your old behavior and then received a full upload block. Despite the warnings that followed, you continued to mess with images and engaged in edit wars. You only listen when you realize your actions have consequences. I made the following suggestion in the Final Warning section above: "if you do make an edit and someone reverts you, do not revert it back, even if you think you are right. If you really want that edit in, then engage with the user that did it and discuss it with them and learn why they did it. But, if you ignore this advice and engage in any new edit war, then I'd say that settles it and you're not ready for Wikipedia." And you did ignore it. Your behavior only distracts other users who have to clean up your mess and feel like they talk to a wall because you refuse to listen and learn how Wikipedia operates. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 21:25, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. So I just read everything you both had to say. Some stuff I agree with and stuff I don't. So to ThomasO1989 and Sergecross73, I highly recommend reading through the whole thing, because holy cow, I have a lot to talk about. So I guess I should probably address why the whole file uploading situation. You were right, I didn't understand the rules and I did known them once I got unblocked, I was just careless out of my mind trying to find this Sonic Movie 2 poster but since I couldn't find it, I figured I might as well upload this one in high quality but ran into several issues with that. So that got me a permanent uploading block. Now for the editing block. Of course in that big argument between me, Sergecross and a few other admins, they were threatening to block me due to me not making any edits that weren't reverted, of course being pushed to the edge by my "Woahness" edit on Dark Side of the Moon. As far as Thomas's argument goes about discussing with another user and learning from them. I did that. With you guys! But then we come to Magical Mystery Tour and my terrible inbox edit and my extreme ignorance on how it's not ugly cannot be forgiven. And now we're here. Please tell me if I missed anything but for the most part, I think I signified all of my mistakes and said everything I needed to say to prove to you all that I am going to change. I was on my way to doing that. I was actually starting to make some actually good contributions on articles such as Abbey Road Studios. And then my extreme ignorance came back with the Magical Mystery Tour and now not a day goes by where I don't regret making that edit and reverting it again. So please, I ask for one more chance to make it all right. I will not let any of you down. I promise. ChallengeCick (talk) 14:58, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have only acknowledged the bad edits that Serge and I have explicitly brought up. Since the final warning from Serge, you received two explicit warnings from Tkbrett for your edits at Please Please Me and The Beatles and you edit warred at Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band. That's all I'm going to say. We're not going to keep listing off every offense you've made, have you apologize for that specific offense and then act like everything's ok now. Competence is required. You're simply not ready to be editing Wikipedia. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 15:52, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh come on your telling me I'm not ready. Why are you trying to make this personal? I acknowledged my good and bad edits. But the good doesn't matter to you. You only wanna focus on the bad. Dude, if you actually paid, I did what you said to do. Which is discussing with another user and learning from them. I wasn't aware about why only Parlophone was mentioned and not both Parlophone and Capitol. But after I knew that, I added that in Rubber Soul. Stop making this personal and start seeing what I'm truly capable of if you give me one more chance. ChallengeCick (talk) 18:42, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see no evidence of you actually learning anything. I've been warning you about bad edits since last February, and it appears other warnings trace back to as far back as last October. We've been discussing these things with you for far too long. The only evidence of change in your editing patterns is when blocks literally prevent you from doing it anymore. Which is about the strongest evidence for a good block there is. Sergecross73 msg me 17:04, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes down to it, you've only been warning about 2 things:

1. Unnesccary file uploading

2. Reverted edits

Both issues I've tried to solve, but you and several other admins didn't allow me. You'd rather just not care and have me blocked seeing as I only started editing in October 2021. Of course, rookies always lose against the veterans, now matter how hard they try. ChallengeCick (talk) 18:44, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh please. You have repeatedly violated rules and made incredibly bad judgement calls. You conceded as much in your own (rejected) unblock request. There's no one to blame but you here. I mean, seriously, how many times have editors told you to stop altering image sizes? You literally never stopped doing this - you did it until your very last article edit before I blocked you. This is what happens when you don't take warnings seriously. Sergecross73 msg me 19:34, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Listen bro. You need to remember something: We all make mistakes! And that obviously includes me. You're right I did concede my own mistakes because and unblock requests to show you that I' slowly changing and becoming more aware. I'm not blaming anyone here. You were justifying to make me aware of my problems and I ignored and several other admins. I'm just saying, please (and I can't stress this enough), please give me one last chance. If I manage to show you that I can be a decent editor who is learning and is self-aware of the mistakes he made and is improving his skills on Wikipedia, then all the arguments, the trials, the problems. Everything would have been worth it. I'm not asking for the world here, but please. Let me continue my new found love: Editing on Wikipedia. ChallengeCick (talk) 21:24, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're free to give another stab at an WP:UNBLOCK request, but no, I won't be the one to unblock you. Sergecross73 msg me 20:34, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look at that but if you're not gonna block me after admitting everything and promising the world and beyond for you, then who will be? Because it's clear you're desperately trying to keep me from editing ever again! I don't know if you just don't like me or you're just annoyed I can't live up to your standards or something. Hey buddy, I'm not the student and you're not the mentor. This isn't 2010 NXT here. You just need to trust me! ChallengeCick (talk) 21:32, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're so close. The truth is that no Admin is going to unblock you after your conduct. As another Admin already already told you, your only real chance is the WP:STANDARDOFFER. Sergecross73 msg me 22:31, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking 3 months instead of 6 cause weather you want to admit it or not, I've made 2 major mistakes since October (heck even you admitted them yourself). Both I've tried resolve but to no eval. So yeah, I don't get why I have to wait 6 months for my mistakes seeing as those don't cost 6 months of blockage. ChallengeCick (talk) 16:31, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You don't get to negotiate the terms of the standard offer. The cockiness you demonstrate by insisting you've only "made 2 major mistakes since October" despite most of your talk page covered in warnings is only digging you a deeper hole. If you really think you're in the right, prove it by opening another WP:UNBLOCK request and showing that an admin other than Serge will agree with you. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 18:32, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well even if I do think I'm largely in the right, every time I'm gonna make another appeal, either Serge is gonna respond with a incredibly obvious response, or another admin is gonna agree with Serge cause he's been an admin for a long time, or something else I just can't wrap my mind around. So I genuinely don't know. All I know is, I'm asking to be unblocked and once I do, you'll see the growth on full display. One of you just have to make the first move before everything can go into effect. ChallengeCick (talk) 23:01, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Then you're wasting your time. Serge obviously isn't going to unblock you, and I'm not an admin. Either attempt a new WP:UNBLOCK request or wait six months to do the standard offer. If neither of those work, then you're out of luck. ThomasO1989 (talk) 00:13, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Serge is just an unforgivable kind of guy. If all your edits don't go perfectly or even worse, if you make a mistake, then expect an indefinite block. I hate that. And I wish this mindset can be changed because it's extremely unfair. ChallengeCick (talk) 10:34, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #61012

is closed. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:47, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The fact you responded that fast and that disrespectful is horrific to say the least. ChallengeCick talk 17:12, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What's horrific or disrespectful about it? It's a standard boiler plate UTRS response. Your talk page isn't revoked, so UTRS is not the place to appeal. -- ferret (talk) 18:56, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen the message itself? I place my appeal, and a few minutes later, friedokra responds with THAT message. If you've seen it, then you know what I'm talking about. ChallengeCick talk 22:57, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just wait till you see my response to your current ticket. SMDH Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:15, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, of course I read it. It's extremely polite with a full explanation on the proper way to make an unblock request. You're going to be hard pressed to get any admin to take your appeal seriously if you're making such baseless accusations as this. -- ferret (talk) 01:30, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm talking about the first message. The second one was ok. But no one is willing to give me a second chance because they don't believe in second chances. My first chance resulted in 2 blocks. And ow, my second chance will result in no blocks. Trust me. ChallengeCick talk 12:53, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) As someone who has your talk page on my watchlist from a prior conversation, and has been loosely following the unblock requests, can I offer a bit of advice? This isn't going anywhere -- you should take the WP:STANDARDOFFER. The standard offer really is the best way to demonstrate to admins that you're ready to continue editing Wikipedia. — Czello 13:02, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But standard offer is 6 months though and I'm ready to continue and change my ways NOW. Plus, it's unlikely after 6 months with users like Serge or Thomas who I've had a novel's length of arguments, that they'll unblock me after waiting for half a year. ChallengeCick talk 13:49, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But you're not going to convince them to unblock you now, either. In fact, the longer you do the less likely it's going to happen. The standard offer is the only way to demonstrate that (and I think if you keep pushing it, even that will get taken off the table). — Czello 15:05, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But I don't understand why that's the only option when it's only 2 mistakes and I'm constantly promising a change. Deepfriedokra said that I need to show that I'm ready to edit before I get unblocked. Now let me ask how am I supposed to show that when I'm virtually being held on strings? ChallengeCick talk 22:47, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As usual, you ignore everything Serge and I told you. You say "only 2 mistakes", but you repeated those same "mistakes" over and over, was warned about it over and over, and only stopped making those "mistakes" only after you were blocked. The fact you won't admit that it wasn't two individual occurrences but a long-term pattern is part of why no one is believing your empty promises. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 22:58, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok so it looks like until now you didn't realize what I was talking about. Dude, I am fully aware that I repeated those 2 mistakes over and over again, but they're still 2 mistakes, and I know that this was a long-term thing. In both of my unblocks, I have shown that I am fully aware of all that and asking for one more chance to make it all right. So yeah I'm not ignoring anyone. I'm just bad at wording things most of the time ChallengeCick talk 23:03, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you repeat the same grave mistake over and over at say, a job, they don't say you made only one mistake. They fire you for incompetence. Same principle here. It's the way it works in the real world, "dude." --ThomasO1989 (talk) 23:08, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I completely understand what you're trying to say, but I want to be aware of something. In life, there is always a second chance. It's called tomorrow. A new day. A new mindset. A new drive. And when you find, you gotta take advantage of it and go out with a bang. And that's exactly what I've been preaching this whole time. I just want to see it and realize that there's a second chance around all of us. Including me. ChallengeCick talk 00:07, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your "second chance" (perhaps even the fourth or fifth) was when Serge gave you the final warning back in May. And you blew it with the edits to Magical Mystery Tour, so now you must face the consequences. Check back in six months. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 00:28, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I hate to get personal here, but edits that I made when I wasn't doing well (both physically and mentally), decide my block? Plus, if you look back at that final warning conversation, it wasn't just about edits for stuff like dark side of the moon and Mario Kart 8. It was mainly about my reverted edits. First chance, blew it. Second chance, blew it. Third chance, gonna make it right. Also, with many contents like that, I think I need to make an archive of it. The problem is I'm blocked and I can't edit so someone has to do it for me. ChallengeCick talk 05:48, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to repeat it again. Take the WP:STANDARDOFFER and come back in six months. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 17:23, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok fine. You won the argument and I'll take the 6 month break. But please note this, when I come back in December/Janurary, I'll be keeping my word on literally everything I promised. With that said, I'm out. Sadly. ChallengeCick talk 21:32, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DFO only left a single message. Are you talking about "Action: set status as DECLINE"? That's an automatic system message simply from the request's status being changed. DFO didn't type that, it's just a system log message. -- ferret (talk) 14:56, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not talking about. Look at the reply I sent to Czello. ChallengeCick talk 22:48, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons for my unblocking

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).

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

Request reason:

Look, It took me a few days to realize but now I can understand that there have been many factors that have led to my block. My reverted edits, the unnecessary and wrong type of file uploading, how I've handled images in articles. But of course, everyone can change and that includes me. My apologies if I came off as a little bit cocky in the talk page. It just depends on my mood that day. Well today (and hopefully onwards), I can proudly say that I'm willing to learn from my mistakes and make my edits right. There's just one thing that needs to be done first ;) ChallengeCick (talk) 11:05, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I don't see a pathway to being unblocked without the standard offer. Maybe someone else will, but not me. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 14:00, 22 July 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.

Why? I'm being serious about all my claims. Can't you give someone a chance to grow? Also, I need help making an archive for my talk page. Cause I need tomato at least one from all those conversations and alerts. ChallengeCick talk 21:57, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've already explained it to you - You've never stopped any of your disruptive editing until a block literally stopped you from doing it. So no one is convinced of your unblock requests. I won't be responding further. Follow WP:STANDARDOFFER and don't WP:BLOCKEVADE or that account will be blocked too. Sergecross73 msg me 23:23, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For ThomasO1989

Listen brother, I know we had an agreement to the WP:STANDARDOFFER, but I've come across some articles that need some input from my part. So yeah, I keep saying one last chance, and you said that I was given chances and I blew it with the Magical Mystery Tour edits. But I promise, dumb edits won't ever happen again. ChallengeCick talk 11:29, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SMDH, you didn't even last a week. Several points:

As I already told you, I'm not an admin. It's simply not up to me to unblock you. You have to be unblocked by an admin, and at least three have stated they will not, in spite of your promises. So, it's futile to think anyone will.
As I and several others have noted, constantly begging for another chance is digging you a deeper hole. It shows that you still can't accept the outcome of something you don't agree with, and that attitude would only lead to more edit-warring if one decided to unblock you. Best thing you can do is stop asking for additional chances.

Come back in six months. I'm not responding to you again. Good bye. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 19:17, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Believe me brother, I was trying to stay away from it until December, but every time I was going about with my day, it just kept coming up to point where I couldn't hold it much longer. I know you're not an admin, but you've kinda been the moderator of this "debate". And since every admin on here has a problem with me even if some of them have nothing to do with me, I just don't know what am I supposed to feel right about now. So I guess I'll leave the articles that needed my input and leave with this: When I come back in 6 months, I expect someone to unblock me by taking the standard offer as promised, because after all, everyone deserves a second chance.

Articles that need my input:

Hope you take all I said into consideration for once. See ya. ChallengeCick talk 15:48, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For 331dot

When I was looking through some articles and went back to my talk page and read your decline, I realized something so shocking. You didn't have any role in getting me blocked. So if you come across this message, don't go all savage and delete my usage of the talk page. Rather, explain why you declined the request so I can understand what was happening behind my back throughout that "debate". ChallengeCick talk 16:06, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My answer speaks for itself and I have nothing to add. 331dot (talk) 16:20, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

People involved in you being blocked should not be reviewing your requests. 331dot (talk) 16:23, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page accesss revoked

You've gotten three rejected unblock requests and you've been told repeatedly that asking for things more lenient than the standard offer won't work, and now you're badgering people about it. Talk page access revoked - you've exhausted the community's patience, and you have no real need for it any time soon anyways. You need to take time away from Wikipedia, you aren't ready right now. Feel free to ask for an unblock through UTRS after 6 months, but I highly recommend taking a different approach than you have for the last few months when the time comes, because none of this was remotely persuasive. Sergecross73 msg me 19:50, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #67202

is declined. Despite trying to claim eligibility under WP:SO, this user hadn't even gone 12 hours since they had last evaded their block. This attempt to mislead us should count against any future unblock request. They are next eligible for unblock consideration under WP:SO no sooner than 2023-06-24, and only if they refrain from any further evasion. -- Yamla (talk) 01:33, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Standard offer

I'm noting attempted block evasion today, meaning this user is not eligible for WP:SO prior to 2023-07-13. -- Yamla (talk) 12:30, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unbelievable. It probably goes without saying, but any admin reviewing this, please run it by me if you're seriously considering unblocking. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 17:04, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:WWE New Year's Revolution logo.png

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:09, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]