User talk:Rubenaf16

Alright i admit it. I lashed out at some editors mainly due to some editing disputes. Ill be more careful from now on to attack the edits and not the editors. Please revoke my suspension.

Welcome!

Hi Rubenaf16, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you have any questions, you can get help from experienced editors at the Teahouse. Happy editing! Robby.is.on (talk) 17:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

Hello, I'm Robby.is.on. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Taiwo Awoniyi, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Robby.is.on (talk) 17:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Emiliano Martínez, 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. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:33, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

some of the data before editing does not have any source and i simply just added their full names together reliable to many other sources and corrected spelling mistakes, but i guess adding info into articles is now a crime. okay then. Rubenaf16 (talk) 14:41, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't looked into your edit at Emiliano Martínez but at Taiwo Awoniyi you changed their second name from "Micheal" to "Michael" even though "Micheal" was supported by a reference from The Football Association. You also didn't include an WP:edit summary with your change so it was unclear to me why you made it. Robby.is.on (talk) 18:09, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

there. now i added my edits, this time with a source. Better not change, otherwise i wont visit ur site ever again. good luck. Rubenaf16 (talk) 17:48, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Andy Diouf, you may be blocked from editing. Mattythewhite (talk) 14:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I literally gave the full name of balerdi with a legitimate video source from the league, and you keep reverting it back. Have some shame, honestly. Rubenaf16 (talk) 16:05, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The warning is about Andy Diouf where you didn't include a source at all. At Leonardo Balerdi, I may have left the full name sourced to the Ligue 1 Youtube video but I agree with Matty that it is not a great reference.

Thanks for your work here adding footballers' full names. You really need to remember to always include citations. Wikipedia has strict policies about sourcing for so-called "BLPs". If you were to continue to add unsourced content to BLPs, you'd risk getting blocked from editing and that would be shame. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 16:21, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok then. appreciated. Rubenaf16 (talk) 16:49, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Ademola Lookman. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:28, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David Carmo: OK, no vandalism (so i apologise for the edit summary), but you destroyed the other source in box, that was my main problem. I have arranged things accordingly now. Happy editing/new year! --RevampedEditor (talk) 12:24, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
fair play. happy new year. Rubenaf16 (talk) 14:21, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

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 Alexia Putellas, you may be blocked from editing. Last warning; if you continue to remove sourced references to Catalonia from BLP articles you will be blocked. Black Kite (talk) 19:16, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then. I guess u hate when someone edits. Good for you. I won't touch your site again. Good luck. Rubenaf16 (talk) 06:54, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 2024

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Alexa Grasso, 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. Cassiopeia talk 09:28, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Ariane Lipski, you may be blocked from editing. Cassiopeia talk 09:29, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Quincy Hoeve, you may be blocked from editing. Cassiopeia talk 09:36, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you even have a brain or what? The full name was already confirmed in his page; i just added it as most readers just want a glimpse of his main data cover without opening the page. If freedom to edit is a crime for you, then fine. I won't touch your page again. Rubenaf16 (talk) 10:40, 25 April 2024 (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 Xavier Mbuyamba. Cassiopeia talk 09:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where the hell is my edits unsourced when the info about his full name is itself present in the page? Did you get dropped on your head? Seriously? Rubenaf16 (talk) 10:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have need to specify in your edit summary. Secondly, comment on the edit and not the editor as this is considered personal attack. Cassiopeia talk 11:09, 25 April 2024 (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 Ablie Jallow. Giant Snowman 08:30, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Marco Asensio, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Palma. 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) 19:54, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Enough

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent personal attacks and addition of unsourced content.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:09, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock

I would like to know as to who did I personally attack. None of my information has been inaccurate, I always cited sources. Please get me proof. Rubenaf16 (talk) 09:20, 15 November 2024 (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).

Rubenaf16 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I would like to know whom did I personally attack.i try my best to add as much reliably add info with sources, that gets turned down quite frequently. Please give me an insight. Who did I offend?

Decline reason:

if you cannot recognize and acknowledge the personal attacks you made on this very talk page, you certainly cannot be unblocked-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 10:24, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unblock

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

Rubenaf16 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Alright i admit it. I lashed out at some editors due to some editing disputes. Ill be more careful from now on to attack the edit and not the editor. Please revoke my suspension. Rubenaf16 (talk) 12:06, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This convinces me it would be a mistake to lift the block. Nor have you even attempted to address your long history of WP:BLP violations. Yamla (talk) 12:23, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unblock

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

Rubenaf16 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Give me one instance of personality biography violations by me. I have cited sources for about 95% of my edits, that too being reliable ones. The earliest faulty edits of mine were when i was newly introduced to editing and didnt know anything. About attacking editors, i agree i made a mistake but am i gonna get suspended fully just for doing my passion? I know it myself that i wouldnt edit unless without a source. You can check my history for yourself. I love editing as im a big geek myself and feel good feeding info to the masses. Rubenaf16 (talk) 16:20, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This was completely unsourced. If a source already in the article indicates that, you need to make that clear. If you are so passionate that you are careless with important rules and make personal attacks when challenged, you should indeed be blocked. Perhaps you should find topics to edit that arouse less passion in you. I think it would be a mistake to remove this block. 331dot (talk) 17:18, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unblock

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Rubenaf16 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i already told before: the edits I made in the past were unsourced and reckless since I was new to editing and didn't know much about citing or rules. I know I made a mistake as well by attacking editors. Now please revoke this suspension as I've already accepted my mistake. Rubenaf16 (talk) 19:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=i already told before: the edits I made in the past were unsourced and reckless since I was new to editing and didn't know much about citing or rules. I know I made a mistake as well by attacking editors. Now please revoke this suspension as I've already accepted my mistake. [[User:Rubenaf16|Rubenaf16]] ([[User talk:Rubenaf16#top|talk]]) 19:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=i already told before: the edits I made in the past were unsourced and reckless since I was new to editing and didn't know much about citing or rules. I know I made a mistake as well by attacking editors. Now please revoke this suspension as I've already accepted my mistake. [[User:Rubenaf16|Rubenaf16]] ([[User talk:Rubenaf16#top|talk]]) 19:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=i already told before: the edits I made in the past were unsourced and reckless since I was new to editing and didn't know much about citing or rules. I know I made a mistake as well by attacking editors. Now please revoke this suspension as I've already accepted my mistake. [[User:Rubenaf16|Rubenaf16]] ([[User talk:Rubenaf16#top|talk]]) 19:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Rubenaf16 (talk) 19:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, there! We appreciate your apology. Can you explain the types of edits you would like to make to Wikipedia and how you will do better moving forward? Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:55, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Last chance

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).

Rubenaf16 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i already told before: the edits i made in the past were unsourced and reckless since i was new to editing and didn't know much about citing or important rules. I know i made a mistake as well by attacking editors. As ive already accepted my mistake, please revoke my suspension. Ill make sure this is my last chance. Rubenaf16 (talk) 13:40, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline. You already have an unblock request open. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 02:02, 21 November 2024 (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.