User talk:Kinsley Bottom

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Kinsley Bottom, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Beeblebrox (talk) 20:54, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kinsley Bottom, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi Kinsley Bottom! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like 78.26 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

March 2021[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to James Gordon (character) have 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: James Gordon (character) was changed by Kinsley Bottom (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.893353 on 2021-03-26T21:49:25+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 21:49, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Miles Morales[edit]

Hi. Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for working to improve the site with your edit to Miles Morales, as we really appreciate your participation. However, the edit had to be reverted, because you removed content from the article's Infobox, and added to it material lacking a supportive citation. Wikipedia cannot accept uncited material. Wikipedia requires that the material in its articles be accompanied by reliable, verifiable (usually secondary) sources explicitly cited in the article text in the form of an inline citation, which you can learn to make here. If you ever have any other questions about editing, or need help regarding the site's policies, just let me know by leaving a message for me in a new section at the bottom of my talk page. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 03:53, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021[edit]

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Batman, Catwoman, and Two-Face) for a period of 1 week for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:06, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021[edit]

You're going to need to exercise more caution in your editing. You may be trying to help, but some of it comes across as vandalism. (such as your edit to Dean Martin.) — Ched (talk) 08:26, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring[edit]

I see you were blocked for edit warring a couple months ago. I recommend you reconsider your current behavior at Captain America and try using the talk page to generate consensus for your preferred version of the infobox. Argento Surfer (talk) 20:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You tell the other guy too, considering he’s been putting random stuff in those pages that you have reverted yourself too. Kinsley Bottom (talk) 04:08, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"I wasn't the only one breaking the rule" won't be a valid defense when an admin takes notice... Argento Surfer (talk) 10:40, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I asked him to start a conversation on the talk so we can settle this. I told to leave the page as it was before he edited and he reverted it. Also, on the Wasp page he just wrote the sources in the edit summary, not in the article. This user even admitted it that he doesn’t know how this place works. I don’t think, he’s heard of edit warring, discussing on talk pages to settle arguments, listing sources on actual article. His history has proven, that he’s adding stuff that isn’t supported by claims. He just puts just because he said it. Kinsley Bottom (talk) 16:32, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021[edit]

Hello, I'm Magitroopa. I noticed that you recently removed content from List of SpongeBob SquarePants episodes without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Magitroopa (talk) 09:44, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They were my edits, I made the changes in the films section. Wasn’t sure on how to word it. But, they were mine. I would be having a disagreement with myself apparently. Kinsley Bottom (talk) 23:45, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on SpongeBob SquarePants. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. As you were already told, Nickelodeon is the original distributor of the show- we don't use the 'distributor' parameter in this case. Same exact thing goes for other Nickelodeon shows including The Casagrandes, Side Hustle, etc. Either way, you also fail to source the distributor as well. Now knock it off or you will be reported. Magitroopa (talk) 06:50, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nickeldeon is just the network that airs the episodes. That company is the one that releases those shows like for Example: South Park, The Daily Show, Jersey Shore, Jersey Shore: Family Vacation, Beavis and Butt-Head, Yellowstone (American TV series) and even some iconic Nickeldeon shows like Dora the Explorer, The Fairly OddParents, Avatar: The Last Airbender, and iCarly, just to name a few have them. So again, I ask you. Should I remove the distribution on those pages because of your argument that the network is the distributor. And that doesn’t just apply to ViacomCBS, I mean from companies like Disney, WarnerMedia, Netflix, NBCUniversal, Amazon, etc. Please make your case on why those should be kept but for some reason this doesn’t.

June 2021[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Thor: Love and Thunder. You have been reverted numerous times now for your continued reinstating edits on Thor: Love and Thunder over claims that the character of Nebula is still an Avenger, citing an article ONLY discussing her role as such in Avengers: Endgame. This has been explained to you by myself and other editors, and your ignoring of this has led me to give you your final warning. As the notice says, if you reinstate your edits again, you may be blocked from editing for vandalism and/or disruptive editing. Trailblazer101 (talk) 23:48, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Let’s talk about it in its talk page.Kinsley Bottom (talk) 23:49, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add content which gives undue weight to some statement about a living person, as you did at Elizabeth Olsen. On Wikipedia we take particular care over articles about living people.

New information, even if referenced, should be added only if noteworthy, relevant and documented in multiple reliable third-party sources. Wikipedia is not a newspaper and material should not be added if it is only gossip or has little longer-term importance, or if the only sourcing is tabloid journalism.

If challenged, the onus is on the editor who adds the content to justify its retention. Thank you. KyleJoan^talk 08:15, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment[edit]

When expanding a list, like you did in List of awards and nominations received by Bob's Burgers, ALWAYS remember to UPDATE the table. This includes changing the nomination count and adding the new award shows you sourced. I did it for you, but please remember to update the table. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 11:46, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

{{Nathaniel Richards}}[edit]

Hi there Kinsley Bottom, I noticed that you appear to be engaged with a dispute with 21AndSon over {{Nathaniel Richards}}. I advise you both to discuss your issues with the template on the template's talk page (or here, actually) first before repeatedly reverting each other, which may be considered edit-warring. Thank you. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:51, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sock[edit]

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.

Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:46, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]