User talk:Annmorgan24

November 2018

Regarding your edit to Elliott Broidy, which I have removed, in general it's not appropriate to add people's home addresses. And please don't use the nowiki tag until you understand how it works. Using the preview function will let you see whether your pending changes are going to damage the readability of an article; I'll attach more information about that below. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 17:00, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Elliott Broidy, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.

The "show preview" button is right next to the "publish changes" button and below the edit summary field.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Jessicapierce (talk) 17:00, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Annmorgan24, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Elliott Broidy have been removed, as they appear to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:24, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

Hello, I'm R333ct0r. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Elliott Broidy, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! R333ct0r (talk) 20:52, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject or any other entity. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. R333ct0r (talk) 02:14, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have recently shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect: any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or any page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

The response to creating an page deleted as an attack should not be to recreate an almost identical page - keep this up and you will be blocked or topic banned from American Politics. I strongly suggest you read and review WP:BLP before continuing to edit here. Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:27, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

notice of moved discussion

I have moved your post at WT:BLP to WP:BLP/N which is better suited for specific instances of BLP. --Masem (t) 00:50, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 01:58, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Annmorgan24 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Dear Wiki and Bbb23 , please unblock you my page, because of the abusively used multiple accounts. A measure was taken to create a second account page because i have lost my password and mail access, this is a matter of a purely technical nature. From my side, there has never been a violation attack, slander, and other things. my revisions and edits to Mr. Elliott Broidy Wikipedia page are based on accurate, current, and reliable sources from highly trusted American and international media such as The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, BBC, CNBC, Al Jazeera, Los Angeles Times, Bloomberg, Politico, New York Magazine, New York Daily News, Esquire, Buzzfeed, The Huffington Post, The Times of Israel, OCCRP, and many others. Additionally, there are public records available in open source that support the revisions I have made. Material about Elliot Broidy has been written with the greatest care and attention to verifiability, neutrality, and avoidance of original research.Let's come to an agreement and understand to resolve this issue and the edit. Reagrds Annmorgan24 (talk) 19:00, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This does not appear to be accurate. LiamGold019 was created on 2019-01-17. This account, Annmorgan24, edited before and after. This looks like a straight-forward case where you set up another account, in violation of WP:SOCK, to continue editing an article where you were engaged in a dispute. Realistically, there's no chance of an unblock until you deal with this violation. Even then, it's unlikely you'll be unblocked without a topic ban on that, and possibly related, articles. And you may have to demonstrate you are capable of avoiding further violations of WP:SOCK, such as by refraining from editing for a period of time. Finally, you seem to be unclear on your responsibilities under WP:CITE. Yamla (talk) 00:06, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note, while I do not believe you should be unblocked, it's not at all clear on further investigation that you've violated WP:CITE. --Yamla (talk) 00:11, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]