Alanpopo123

June 2016

Hello, I'm Livelikemusic. An edit that you recently made to Brooke Logan seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, 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! livelikemusic talk! 02:02, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of James "Jim" Cryer

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on James "Jim" Cryer requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(✉) 21:33, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

The haves and have nots

Excuse me, there were seven new cast members who were made stars for the shows latest season: their names are Danielle deadwyler, Shari hardly, Allison mcatee, Jon chaffin, Brett Davis and Nicholas (forgot his name, it's on the character table) they all need to be added to the "starring" list, at the very top of the article, I can't add them, my computer is broke and I edit with a phone, until it's repaired Zhyboo (talk) 01:19, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

The last actors full name is Nicholas james Zhyboo (talk) 01:23, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Please respond back or add them! Zhyboo (talk) 02:19, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

July 2016

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Caroline Spencer, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. livelikemusic talk! 18:54, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow, or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains under way. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Thank you. nyuszika7h (talk) 22:36, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

If those names are really the way they are credited (which I cannot verify right now as I don't watch the show), then how come they have been at their previous title for many years? The articles do make a mention of the other names in the infoboxes but there is no source at all – I don't know if they are true as I don't watch the show, but either way putting the names together is WP:OR if it wasn't explicitly stated in the show. nyuszika7h (talk) 22:42, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@Nyuszika7H: All of the moves they've made go against the common-name of each article. The Other names parameter was introduced to {{Infobox soap character}} because of fan-cruft editors who added the names to the lead paragraph, and was decided at the Soaps Project that only the common-name should be used in the lead and main ibox parameters, and that the "Other names" could be used for any kind of potential marital names used on soaps, but that the common-name should remain, as most soap fans automatically assume once a female character marries, their name changes. livelikemusic talk! 13:16, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to move pages to bad titles contrary to naming conventions or consensus, you may be blocked from editing. Sro23 (talk) 01:15, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

It's seems you're not listening to other editors. Can you tell me why I shouldn't block you to prevent future undiscussed page moves? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:46, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

@NeilN: This editor has ignored your question by making another page move. They have carried on with their disruption in moving articles against common name guides despite countless editors contacting them.Rain the 1 16:57, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

I've reverted all your page moves from today. These are potentially controversial renames and you must go through the requested move process outlined at WP:RM#CM. The fact that you've returned to these moves despite multiple warnings to discuss them first is disruptive. clpo13_(talk) 17:07, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:13, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Repeating what I said to you on my talk page, you need to discuss your page moves with the other editors who have posted on your talk page opposing them. Please engage in discussion first before making any more moves. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:16, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

NeilN, this editor has gone back to moving pages sans discussion after the block. I'm not sure how much more clear we can make it that potentially controversial moves need to be discussed. clpo13_(talk) 20:55, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016

Welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for reverting your recent experiment. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead, as someone could see your test before you revert it. Thank you. Sro23 (talk) 20:39, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:03, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Resumption of previous behavior that necessitated a block. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:06, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Alanpopo123 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

UTRS appeal #16295 was submitted on Aug 07, 2016 16:20:32. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 16:20, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Block evasion

Socking here will only make things worse. Don't do it, unless you would like your block extended to indefinite. Sro23 (talk) 18:39, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Due to checkuser confirmed block evasion your block time has been reset to one month from today.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:43, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

September 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Candace Young. Mlpearc (open channel) 21:42, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Candace Young 2.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Candace Young 2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:34, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

September 2016

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for edit warring and persistent disruptive editing indicating that you are not here to contribute to the encyclopedia, as you did at Candace Young. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:55, 26 September 2016 (UTC)