User talk:Ampupu123
Ampupu123, you are invited to the Teahouse!
[edit]
|
Hi Ampupu123! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 16 December 2020 (UTC) |
December 2020
[edit]
Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that in this edit to Block Z, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:51, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Joshua Garcia. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.
- If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
- ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
- If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place
{{Help me}}on your talk page and someone will drop by to help. - The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Joshua Garcia was changed by Ampupu123 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.873197 on 2020-12-18T03:29:15+00:00
Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 03:29, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 7
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited San Miguel Beermen, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Chris Ross and Brandon Brown. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Please do not use misleading edit summaries when making changes to Wikipedia pages. This behavior is viewed as disruptive, and continuation may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you.TheHotwiki (talk) 12:08, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
[edit]
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) 01:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
December 2023
[edit]
Hello, I'm 98Tigerius. I noticed that you recently removed content from Kathryn Bernardo without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 [📩] 18:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
March 2024
[edit] Please do not add or change content, as you did at June Mar Fajardo, 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. Dieter Lloyd Wexler 15:21, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 20
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Un/Happy for You, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Deadline.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Notice
[edit] Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Hotwiki (talk) 15:53, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
Notice on edit warring
[edit]
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about 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. Solidandrewsister (talk) 00:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
The Hows of Us’ worldwide gross
[edit]I noticed that you reverted my recent edits on The Hows of Us, List of highest-grossing Philippine films, and List of highest-grossing films in the Philippines. I understand you believe that Rewind grossed more than The Hows of Us at the worldwide box office. However, I have a valid source indicating that The Hows of Us grossed over a billion pesos at the box office, which supports my edit.
To ensure the accuracy of the information on Wikipedia, I kindly ask if you could provide an updated article or source that verifies your claim that Rewind also grossed more than The Hows of Us. If such a source is available, I would gladly reconsider my edit.
In the absence of an updated, reliable source supporting your claim, I believe it’s appropriate to retain my edit, given the validity of my reference. Kenquenito (talk) 16:45, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Kenquenito Already posted the links on the The Hows of Us talk page.
- I'm willing to elevate this matter to wikipedia administrators if you will continue to insist on your claims. Wikipedia has provided avenues that we can resort to in the event that neither of us budges. In the end, it all comes down to the reliability and veracity of our web sources which I'm confident with. Ampupu123 (talk) 13:11, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- So you're saying that the ABS-CBN article is unreliable? Kenquenito (talk) 05:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Kenquenito I'm saying that what was disclosed in the Audited Financial Statements already superseded whatever is indicated in your source article. The previous claim was already debunked by a more reliable, more updated source.
- Your source article was released on February. The audited financial statements was released on April. It is possible that the editor of the article may have committed an error. Once a more reliable source becomes available like the financial statements submitted to the government agencies, the figures provided there will be followed since it has been verified by independent auditors and disclosed to their stakeholders and the public. The company is more likely to commit an error to a press release like your source article than the financial statements they present to the public as a listed company in the stock exchange. Ampupu123 (talk) 08:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- So you're saying that the ABS-CBN article is unreliable? Kenquenito (talk) 05:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
September 10, 2024
[edit]Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
[edit]
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. Solidandrewsister (talk) 06:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Solidandrewsister I will not appeal my block even though I feel that it is unjustified.
- I don't understand that you keep on saying that my claim is false even if my sources are published on a later date and also by the same company. How can you say that the figure disclosed on an earlier article is more reliable than a publicly available verified document published on a later date? Let's say the former is "as of February 2019" and the latter is for "fiscal year ended December 31, 2018." Don't you realize that The Hows of Us has ended its run in November 2018, meaning it has not been shown wherever from January-February 2019?
- If the movie earned P788 million as of December 31, 2018 and assuming it grossed P1 billion as of Feb 2019, would it be possible for a movie to earn P212 million while not being shown in a single cinema during that time frame? But the real issue here is the timing of the figures presented. Feb 2019 vs Apr 2019. The April reported figure already superseded the one in February. One is right and the other is wrong. We're also talking about the nature of our sources. A press release for awards that the network got vs financial statements and annual report covering the movie's theatrical run. No one in their right mind will assert that the annual report in April is not credible over a press release in February, both released by the same network. Yet you had the audacity to call my claims false, and report me to wikipedia admins. Thats fine. If that is the cost of protecting the truth, I'll take it.
- I can provide more sources that can further support my claim on a later date, but I'll save that when we go to the proper avenues for dispute if thats what you want. This will not end with you initiating a block on me if you don't stop insisting on your P1billion charade. I just hope that this has nothing to do with fanwars. At the end of the day, I'm fighting for truth here and I'll see to it that the correct figures are presented.
- I also hope I'm not talking to the same person (you and Kenquenito being the same cause how ironic the topics on your talk pages are so alike) because that really is saying something about your motive on reporting me. Ampupu123 (talk) 09:17, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Solidandrewsister
- I changed my mind. I will appeal my block. Since you are stubborn with pushing your agenda, we will involve other people within the wiki community to settle this dispute. Ampupu123 (talk) 11:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
September 2024
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 07:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
Ampupu123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Your reason here Ampupu123 (talk) 09:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
- the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
- the block is no longer necessary because you:
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 10:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
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 will not appeal my block, however please watch over the pages I was accused to be "edit warring" as the user who reported me are providing outdated sources and false claims. I've been continuously providing updated sources on the talk pages of one of the contested wiki pages, and it seems like it fell on deaf ears. The user who reported me might be pushing an agenda. This is of utmost importance since the film who holds the title of "highest-grossing Philippine film of all time" is at stake here.
Once the two-week period is over and the user who reported me (or his alt account if they're the same) is still pushing for his outdated sources by that time, I'll be left with no choice but to resort to the proper avenues to settle our edit disputes. Have a good day.
Ampupu123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I changed my mind and I'm appealing my block. This is the first time I got involved with this kind of an incident. I got entangled with two users which I believe is the same person that is trying to push an agenda, overly stubborn and has not been receptive to updated sources. I've been editing for years now, and I haven't been involved in edit warring. You can see my previous edits and I've never been involved with one user, let alone two.
I already started a talk page to the disputed article, but the other party has ceased to explain his side despite me providing more credible sources. I've been more than willing to defend my position, and I will continue to do the same once I get unblocked. I understand what I got blocked for, and I will resort to other avenues to settle our dispute. I will initiate to settle the dispute the right way, and me initiating a talk page have proven that. Ampupu123 (talk) 10:57, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You are only blocked from editing articles, you are free to make use of processes to address your grievances or dispute now. This request provides no reason why you need to be able to edit articles right now. 331dot (talk) 19:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
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.
Your initial statement should replace the words "your reason here", I did this for you here. 331dot (talk) 19:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
October 2024
[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 11:56, 4 October 2024 (UTC)Ampupu123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I'm currently in a content dispute with user Kenquenito on the article of The Hows of Us. The edits made were legitimate as it was citing a correct and updated source, thus I believe is an appropriate use of a secondary account. This is not vandalism in any way.
However , if you decide to block me indefinitely, please let me file and request a dispute to put an end to the ongoing argument. I cannot do so if I'm blocked. Through this way, I can go through the proper process. I cannot let the misleading claims of this user perpetuate any longer. Ampupu123 (talk) 13:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You don't get to continue arguing about articles while you are blocked. Your next stop forward is convincing the community that you understand why you are blocked, and that you will not repeat that behavior again. Stating that creating sockpuppets is "an appropriate use of a secondary account" is not a good start. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:09, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
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.
Ampupu123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I acknowledge why I'm unblocked. My record has been clean before I got entangled with this user, which spans 4 years. I helped building other wiki pages in the past. My intentions related to my edits are clean. I just want to contribute to the community, fight disinformation and any attempt to distort the truth. Please unblock me. Unblocking will let me resort to proper avenues to resolve disputes instead of sockpuppeting and edit warring. I won't do it again. Ampupu123 (talk) 01:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
As described below, unblocking would currently be unlikely to benefit the encyclopedia. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:50, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
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.
Discussion
[edit]Hi Ampupu123, which edit would be your next one? What exactly would you like to do at the moment? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 03:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- @ToBeFree I would like to request for dispute resolution against the user who put me in this situation in the first place. Before that, I have to edit the talk page that I started. I cannot do both of that right now because I'm blocked. I want to put to rest the topic we've been going back and forth with. Our disputed topic is going nowhere if it is just between the two of us, so I want to involve other users who can come in between to resolve the issue. I just want the truth to prevail. I'm against history revisionism. I can only do that by going through the proper process.
- I would also like to continue editing the basketball pages in the Philippines such as the San Miguel Beermen and some of its players to add updates on their recent endeavors. Ampupu123 (talk) 04:42, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- @ToBeFree Hi! Until when will I be blocked? Since you're the one who blocked me the first time, maybe you can provide some clarity? I just want to get this over with. I want to settle my issue with Kenquenito and the topic we're currently disputing. Blocking me will not let me do any of that. Please give me the opportunity to be heard. Please let me go through the process. Ampupu123 (talk) 01:59, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Ampupu123, I'm not entirely sure how to respond to your request because on one hand, I'm thankful for the detailed answer, while on the other hand, looking at the revision history of the List of highest-grossing Philippine films and the edits made as "Sayy3s0017" while and after your main account was blocked leaves me unwilling to unblock any time soon. Additionally, you still describe this as others' fault ("the user who put me in this situation" is you only) and appear to have revealed that you intend to use Wikipedia's processes to win a fight "against the user" rather than actually intending to resolve a dispute.
- So any answer from me currently just worsens your situation in case someone else would have evaluated this differently. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:46, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Actually, as I'm no longer the blocking administrator and my original block has also expired, I'll go ahead and decline your request. Please don't create further unblock appeals unless your approach to Wikipedia, conflicts and this conflict in particular have fundamentally changed. That won't happen tomorrow or in a week. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:47, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Ampupu123, I reverted your last edits which were personal attacks. Don't do it again, or I'll revoke your access to this page.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:50, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Bbb23
- The Hows of Us did not grossed 1 billion pesos and is NOT the highest grossing Philippine film of all time.
- I believe the above statement is not a personal attack. It is the truth. It may not be me, but someone else will correct the misinformation currently situated in those pages.
- I don't care if you block me forever. I'm done with Wikipedia. My fight for truth ends here. Ampupu123 (talk) 04:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
Blocked for sockpuppetry
[edit]
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.