BoscombeBackOfTheNet
BoscombeBackOfTheNet, you are invited to the Teahouse! edit
|
Hi BoscombeBackOfTheNet! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:01, 25 November 2021 (UTC) |
December 2021 edit
Hello, I'm TCMemoire. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Enumclaw horse sex case—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. – TCMemoire 02:51, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
2021–22 EFL Championship edit
Hi Boscombe - thanks for your recent interest in making edits to this article. I would kindly ask you to consult the wikiproject football Manual of Style when making future edits. Adding decorative flag icons to infoboxes goes against the MOS. We avoid this as you can read here: Pre Consideration (about how to use flags in WP Football). Also as it currently stands, it is incorrect to add Diaz to Ben Brereton's name - it is fine as a mention in his article alone, which you can read about here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football/Archive_147#Ben_Brereton. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. Rupert1904 (talk) 04:09, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi Rupert, thanks for your helpful response. I do think (and I am surprised) that Brereton is not referred to as Ben Brereton Díaz because every media source I have encountered, BBC Sport, Final Score, Sky Sports, FourFourTwo, even Blackburn Rovers’ own media outlets, refer to him as Ben Brereton Díaz. It is the name on the back of his shirt, and it seems ever since his call up to Chile’s national team, that he has almost rebranded his name. Nobody seems to refer to him in the media or in football as just simply ‘Ben Brereton’ anymore. In this respect, I believe Wikipedia is outdated. If you would like me to include sources which refer to him with the name, I can if you want. Thank you! BoscombeBackOfTheNet (talk) 04:20, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Boscombe - thanks for writing back. There has been a lot of discussion about changing Brereton's name to Brereton Diaz on wikipedia but so far the requests have not been supported. However, I see there is currently a new request about the name change on Brereton's article, as other people have noticed that he is now almost always referred to as Brereton Diaz by Blackburn Rovers and trusted media outlets like the BBC, Sky Sports, and The Guardian - as you suggested too. You can support that name change here: Talk:Ben_Brereton#Requested_move_25_December_2021. Rupert1904 (talk) 23:40, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I'm SomeRandomUserGuy. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Nigel Farage 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. Thanks. SomeRandomUserGuy (talk) 20:17, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Requesting page protection edit
Hello. RE this - adding {{pp-vandalism}} does not protect a page - only admins can do this. You need to post at WP:RFPP or use WP:TWINKLE to do it for you. I have protected that article now though. SmartSE (talk) 18:18, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
February 2022 edit
Hello, I'm Loriendrew. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Nancy Cartwright, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. 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! ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 23:22, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
I have a source from IMDB; would it be ok to re add the d.o.b. with this source as a citation? BoscombeBackOfTheNet (talk) 23:43, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Wretchskull (talk) 01:13, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
The article is not a collection of dirty words that she says. It's clear from the context what her style is. ... discospinster talk 22:57, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
April 2022 edit
This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Neil Parish, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Your decorum on the article by vandalizing it as an extended confirmed user is unacceptable. — B. L. I. R. 18:50, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
May 2022 edit
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at AFC Bournemouth, you may be blocked from editing. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:35, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Eurovision Song Contest 2022. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 23:05, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
July 2022 edit
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 06:08, 10 July 2022 (UTC)- As noted in your block summary, this is due to
constant addition of unsourced or irrelevant sexual material about living people
. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 06:11, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
BoscombeBackOfTheNet (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
It was made to sound like I was going around numerous articles and deliberately vandalising Wikipedia with inappropriate sexual commentary, but that is not the case. I believe there has been a misunderstanding. Cupcakke is a hypersexual artist with hypersexual behaviour in terms of her music and lyrical content and the added content was referenced with an interview from YouTube, which was an edit in good faith, not vandalism. Cupcakke is a controversial and provocative artist, so sexual references are apparent in the context, maybe the mistake was that the terminology was more discreet, but this was not vandalism.
Decline reason:
You also weren't always providing sources. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:35, 11 July 2022 (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.
BoscombeBackOfTheNet (talk) 18:54, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
BoscombeBackOfTheNet (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I did provide sources, I sincerely apologise if they were not accurate enough, if I am unblocked and allowed to edit again I will make sure in future that any sources are completely valid. Other users however did remove the sources, but did not remove the content, making it look like I had vandalised, which was NOT the intention at all, which was probably why the admin decided to block. Once again, I apologise for this situation BoscombeBackOfTheNet (talk) 14:01, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Decline reason:
As expected, you're a sock puppet of DorsetTiger. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:26, 12 July 2022 (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.