Eazyetron

Speedy deletion nomination of The Scenes (Irish band)

Hello Eazyetron,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged The Scenes (Irish band) for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Amitbanerji26 (talk) 05:16, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

June 2016

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to California high school basketball championship has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: California high school basketball championship was changed by Eazyetron (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.975423 on 2016-06-05T07:20:53+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 07:20, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Emirates Flight 449 has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Emirates Flight 449. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 02:55, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Emirates Flight 449 (August 18)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MRD2014 was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Emirates Flight 449 and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

—MRD2014 (talk) (contribs) 23:54, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Eazyetron, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! —MRD2014 (talk) (contribs) 23:54, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Emirates Flight 449

Hello, Eazyetron. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Emirates Flight 449".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 22:14, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Persky

The L.A. Times story says, if you read it, that the county Registrar of Voters said only a fraction of the submitted signatures needed to be counted in order to certify the issue for it to be placed on the ballot. The sense of that statement should not be deleted and it's not sensationalistic at all. If you can come up with better language to capture the intent of the source, feel free to do so, but don't delete it because you don't like it. Activist (talk) 08:26, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Important notice regarding all edits relating to living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Neutrality^talk 05:14, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Blocked

I've blocked you for 60 hours given your vandalism and disruptive editing at Aaron Persky. Vandalism is never tolerated, but especially not tolerated in articles on living persons. See WP:BLP. You made disruptive edits to this article on January 25, June 1, and June 6, and have received the official alert above, so please consider this a "last chance" with respect to our policies and guidelines in this area. Neutrality^talk 05:18, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:19, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

August 2020

Hello, I'm Liz. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Killing of George Floyd 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:41, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week to prevent further vandalism, as you did at Derek Chauvin. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}.  —Bagumba (talk) 09:07, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

The thing I wrote under Derek Chauvin is true. Cops are required to use deadly force against blacks Eazyetron (talk) 22:23, 30 August 2020 (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
  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. 331dot (talk) 00:20, 31 August 2020 (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.

If you make another similar request, the block will be lengthened and your access to this page removed. 331dot (talk) 00:20, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

September 2020

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:19, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Please stop making threats against other editors. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:26, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I'm JackintheBox. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Derek Chauvin—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. JACKINTHEBOX • ^TALK 07:04, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent further vandalism, as you did at Derek Chauvin ‎.

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 ~~~~}}.  —Bagumba (talk) 07:07, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

To whom it may concern, I was merely expressing my opinion on the subject under Derek Chauvin. This block is not necessary because I understand that it was wrong to express my honest, truthful opinion on the subject under Derek Chauvin. I will not continue to commit vandalism to write information on my opinion, and will make useful contributions instead. Eazyetron (talk) 23:39, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Decline reason:

No thanks. Yamla (talk) 23:47, 30 September 2020 (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 ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

---

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.