User talk:Pcgmrich

Welcome!

Hi Pcgmrich! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 19:33, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tones and I

I saw a problem with your recent edit at Tones and I, see here. This template is inappropriate for this article. If this was done in error, don't worry I have changed it back. If you want to practise editing try the sandbox. Enjoy your time at Wikipedia.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 19:41, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2020

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Karen Gillan, did not appear constructive and has 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 the 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. Thank you. DonQuixote (talk) 20:03, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:2600:1:9166:5A8D:B1CF:E14B:131F:2E61

A tag has been placed on User:2600:1:9166:5A8D:B1CF:E14B:131F:2E61 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

test page?

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. © Tbhotch^™ (en-3). 23:40, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Try this

This user has been on Wikipedia for 4 years, 6 months and 3 days.

Page moves

Hi. Please don't make controversial pagemoves without discussing them first. Thanks. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 21:03, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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

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

Request reason:

your reason

Decline reason:

No block and no reason -- Amanda (aka DQ) 00:06, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

June 2020

Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow, or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus, as you did to Talk:COVID-19 pandemic. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains underway. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Thank you. ‑ Iridescent 15:17, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, there was a consensus to use COVID-19 pandemic at Special:Permalink/955157312#Requested_move_26_April_2020. --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 15:19, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mdaniels5757, this wasn't a move of the article but of the talkpage, and as such obviously disruptive. Pcgmrich, I'm making allowances as you're a very new editor, but this is now your second warning about goofing around with page moves; please stop. ‑ Iridescent 15:23, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded, with reference to your move of "Supreme Court of the United States" to "Supreme Court of United States" – this is grammatically incorrect and makes no sense at all. Please be mindful of Wikipedia's guidelines on article titles, and make sure that you err on the side of caution by initiating a discussion if in doubt. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 17:48, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And you can knock stuff like this off as well. As I said above, we do assume good faith of new users and I'm willing to believe that you're just experimenting with the interface rather than being intentionally disruptive, but if you want to participate here you need to follow our rules. ‑ Iridescent 15:59, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

National varieties of English

Hello. In a recent edit to the page Little Mix, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. ‑ Iridescent 18:42, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you move a page disruptively, as you did at 1974. Favonian (talk) 18:55, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know you reverted the move, but your fooling around with articles is getting tiresome! Favonian (talk) 18:56, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Just as you were getting the warning above, I was blocking your account. You had been told twice to stop moving pages without getting a consensus first, but you have ignored it and carried on. As well as the move of 1974, you also just moved Supreme Court of the United States to Supreme Court of United States and someone else had to move it back. You are now blocked for 31 hours to stop this disruption, and if you move any more pages when this block expires you will be blocked for longer. However, if you reply here and promise not to move any more pages without first getting a consensus for the move, I will unblock your account (or any other admin who sees it first can do so with my blessing). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:00, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you must stop messing about with templates as you did here, even if you change things back. If you wish to practise editing, please use your sandbox. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:06, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

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.

@Boing! said Zebedee: There was a bunch of logged-out vandalism and they are evading at least one anon rangeblock that was placed specifically for them; I've switched to an indef CU block.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:20, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, thanks Ponyo. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:23, 17 June 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

your reason

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
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 20:58, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

June 2020

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. Sro23 (talk) 21:25, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

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

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

Request reason:

stop moving pages disruptively

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
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. only (talk) 22:15, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Concern regarding Draft:Patrick O'Connell

Hello, Pcgmrich. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Patrick O'Connell, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 01:02, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]