User talk:85.251.23.136

September 2023[edit]

Hello, I'm LizardJr8. I noticed that you recently removed content from Queen (Queen album) 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 the 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. LizardJr8 (talk) 17:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

CS1 error on The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 04:35, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023[edit]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Aladdin Sane, 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. Muhandes (talk) 10:55, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Golden Years (David Bowie song), you may be blocked from editing. Muhandes (talk) 11:01, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the case of Golden Years, I literally cited the source, from a Billboard magazine of the time. 85.251.23.136 (talk) 14:28, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Young Americans (song). – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 15:42, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey friend, I'm just trying to improve the page since there is a bug, the song was number 1 in New Zealand, even Bowie's official Facebook page uploaded it! The New Zealand chart can only be seen since 1975, so you don't see the positions it had before being in the top 7, I'm literally providing a source, this has even been uploaded by Bowie's official Facebook page, what? do you have a problem with that? I'm being objective 85.251.23.136 (talk) 21:18, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand you're trying to act in good faith, but in doing that you're breaking several WP rules.

1. What you're primarily using, a bowiedownunder.com, is clearly a fan site, which is unreliable. If the NZ Listener chart has actual charts on a website or magazine you can use that.

2. In terms of certifications, what you're adding is not supported by the links, meaning it's also un-true

3. You adding the same content back after being reverted and told what is wrong equates to an edit war, which can get users blocked if done enough (see WP:3RR. If you add content and it gets reverted, you go to the talk page to ask why. Re-adding the content without saying anything (i.e. in an edit summary) doesn't help and leads to messages like the above.

So in a way you're being objective, but going about it in the wrong ways. And in other instances you're adding content that isn't supported or for the incorrect album. If you have questions about what's reliable and what's not, please ask, but verify what you're adding/changing is actually supported (such as this). Also, use edit summaries and edit previews. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 22:54, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'm sorry for doing it without thinking enough, I'll explain why I did them. about Young Americans and 1984, why according to the records they have reached that position, I know that I am providing a fan page, and I should provide a more reliable source, I tried to provide the post made by Bowie's official Facebook account, but it didn't let me add a Facebook link, I will try to find a 100% reliable source to follow the rules, although what I was doing is correct, because Bowie's official account is not going to lie, as for Golden Years it was a mistake mine, the position 4 that I saw was in billboard magazine in the hits of the world section, and it appeared top 4 in Belgium, but that does not mean that on the official Belgian chart it reached that position, my fault there, in The issue of certifications, I was doing it according to the estimates of what the album sold according to the time it spent on the charts of a certain country, but of course, I can't put estimates, also at that time, very few countries had the certification system. certification on albums, a similar example is with the album "Slayed?" by the band Slade, which was successful in much of the world, but only has a certification of 20 thousand copies in Finland, which reflects a popularity very far from what it really had in its time, but well, I imagine that the industry changes and only the big markets gave certifications at that time. and well that, there you would have my explanations, as for what I edited in Ziggy Stardust, I don't understand why they deleted it, objectively speaking I provided reliable sources such as a link to the Billboard magazine of that time, because in 1982 billboard began to publish a list called "Midline LPs" which was about the best-selling old records at the time, basically a hit list of albums but only releases from years ago, and in 1983 Bowie's Ziggy Stardust went to number 1 on that list, and It stayed in first position for 35 weeks! So, I don't understand where the problem is, provide real data 85.251.23.136 (talk) 00:40, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

I understand all your chart edits are in good faith, but you cannot use other wikis or fan forums online as sources. Your additions that are cited by world radio history (that I have yet to verify myself) should be ok. But then again, you need to fill out the reference more than a url and title. Please know, I'm not trying to dissuade you from editing. I appreciate you adding these things in good faith. But Wikipedia has rules, particularly regarding the reliability of sources, and I'm simply enforcing them. As I've said before, please try to find actual reliable sources for these charts. Best – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:33, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am adding a source where they explain exactly where they get the information from, the only thing I am trying to change is a reality, in the year end chart of 1973, Aladdin Sane was the first, and that is what counts, I don't understand what the point is put as end year chart of 1973 something that was done in 2007, do you understand? And please, can I know why they are removing the charts of the singles I added? I am literally contributing the radio page, in fact I did it after seeing in another Wikipedia article a Paul McCartney song where Radio Luxembourg was added as the chart, and they don't change anything there? I don't understand, please don't make changes to my edits again, I'm trying to add real information. 85.251.23.136 (talk) 19:03, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to be reasonable here, but that's getting us nowhere. Continue my discussion at Talk:Aladdin Sane over this matter. If you continue edit warring without reaching consensus I will report you to the Administrator's Noticeboard. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 21:59, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of best-selling albums of the 1970s in the United Kingdom. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 17:44, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What are you doing, friend? Why do you want to bother like this and report it? Don't you realize that you don't contribute anything? Seriously, you yourself could logically see that it is completely impossible for Elton's album to have sold more, just look at the number of weeks on the chart, any 2 year old child could see it, besides that in 1973 MUSIC WEEK AND MANY OTHERS MAGAZINES NAMED ALADDIN SANE AS THE BEST SELLING ALBUM OF 1973 IN THE UK, how can you think that something made in 2007 is more important? You were trying to impose your belief, and now I'm going to ask you to please remove my block or appeal it or whatever, because what you've done is terrible. 85.251.23.136 (talk) 23:21, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe use this time to determine what you're doing wrong and how to fix it? Because if you continue edit warring once your block expires you'll be blocked again. WP has rules. You discuss disputes on talk pages. I tried to be reasonable and all you've done is have an I'm right you're wrong mentality, which has led us here. Find an actual reliable source to support your claim and we can move on. Continue doing what you're doing and it'll lead to longer blocks. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 12:41, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

CS1 error on Rebel Rebel[edit]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Rebel Rebel, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 11:46, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:85.251.23.136 reported by User:Zmbro (Result: ). Thank you. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:15, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023[edit]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. ... discospinster _talk 23:18, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

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).

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

Request reason:

Someone reported me and they blocked me for literally correcting incorrect data that was on the page, I was literally providing information about something specific in one year, and that person changed it for something from 30 or more years later, I was helping to improve certain articles, unblock my ip as soon as possible, thank you. 85.251.23.136 (talk) 23:32, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This doesn't address the reason for the block. 331dot (talk) 00:06, 19 October 2023 (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.

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 Young Americans (song), you may be blocked from editing. WP:3RR. Use the talk page or find a different source. Continue edit warring and you'll be reported again. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 21:31, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

November 2023[edit]

Hello, I'm AgisdeSparte. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to The Wild, the Innocent & the E Street Shuffle—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 Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. AgisdeSparte (talk) 01:45, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Check the links that are added to show that the album reached that position in 1973, nothing appears in any of them, why do they tell me this? I don't understand, that springsteen album didn't make it to any list in 1973, I'm a springsteen fan, but he became famous with born to run 85.251.23.136 (talk) 01:49, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:85.251.23.136 reported by User:Zmbro (Result: ). Thank you. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 14:22, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023[edit]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring.

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 review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:02, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

New message from FlightTime[edit]

Hello, 85.251.23.136. You have new messages at Talk:David Bowie.
Message added 16:54, 1 December 2023 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

- FlightTime (open channel) 16:54, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 6 months for evading the block of Informed analysis. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

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 ~~~~}}. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:46, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.