Witchy2006

YOU

are

the

best

person

in

Wikipedia

ever!

-- Wizardy2006 21:18, August 13 2009 (UTC)

Conflict of interests

At first you told us that ratings are unnecessary then, ratings should only be a week ratings stated by you, witchy2006. IN THIS SECTION IT CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THERE IS A LARGE TIME GAP BETWEEN THE TWO and not merely a week of ratings basis.

You accused me on my own page that I am a liar, that MBP won the rating race and not Darna, then i reedited my post to Maricel Soriano and other big stars on subsequent episodes, you are just making a story. I know that you love editing may bukas pa, but i smell conflict of interest bacause you keep on vandalizing the Darna 2009 article which in turn the rival show of this show through deleteing the critical response, trivia section and such while other articles here have them, was there a guideline for not having them? i believe i saw a critical reception in other movie articles here but you have also deleted that section.

J0-r3L (talk -- 14:31, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

• When it comes to Wikipedia, there is no rivalry going on, unless you wanted to. This will be long so I will have to make it into a list:

1) Ratings - The ratings section is needed to imply for the other Reception part sof the section such as the extension of the show for 14 weeks and the January 2010 extension. The extensions can never be explained without the rating information. Plus, the section shows both the ratings of TNS and AGB to avoid conflict, unlike you edits in Darna (2009 TV series) which only looks in system in AGB. Moreover, the ratings of the Darna page, doesn't even seem to connect in any part of the page unlike the May Bukas Pa rating section, which again I have to say, completes the summary of the Reception section.

2) Wrong informations being inserted - You insert a lot of wrong information in the page, especially in the Rival Show section. As I have already explained in your page.

• Maricel Soriano never made an appearance on the show yet.
• The episode with Dolphy did deliver "good ratings" as this link from PEP delivered by TNS, shows that Darna is only at 3rd place, May Bukas Pa at 2nd and TV Patrol World at the top. Where exactly did darna overpassed May Bukas Pa?
• You've stated "and other stars" - ONLY DOLPHY was the new special guest in the show from when Darna debuted.

3) Liar? - I never once called you a liar. I checked all of my edits and not even once I have told you that. And where exactly did I make a story? All that I have mentioned is a fact. Only a person who is guilty, would remove a cooperation message in his page. Clearly, you don't want to cooperate. And I never vandalized Darna (2009 TV series), other users have agreed with me that rating section that doesn't even have any connection from anything in the page is very unnecessary. It's a good faith edit whether you like it or not. PS again, Please stop calling edits that you don't like a "vandalism".

Talkback

Hello, Witchy2006. You have new messages at GSK's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

   GameShowKid – talk – evidence   04:37, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Blocked for edit warring

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for edit warring on May Bukas Pa. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. — Kralizec! (talk) 18:47, 17 August 2009 (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).

Witchy2006 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

What? Wasn't I given any warning? Other users get second chances and even more after recieving warnings, yet I didn't get any? And we have stopped the Edit War and discussed the matter in the article's talkpage where we have set the matter. I even brought it to the Administrator's board for Incidents because J0-r3L wouldn't stop and cooperate, I even have my reason in there on why did I continue reverting his edits. And 31 hours? People who vandalize so many times gets 24 hours, while I get 31?. This is very unjustifying. No warnings, No chances. And this blocking administrator didn't even try to cooperate with me or have any discussions before deciding the block.

Decline reason:

You have been warned about the consequences of edit warring more than once. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 20:04, 17 August 2009 (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.

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).

Witchy2006 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

That is such a lame reason, I gave a very detailed answer and you'll give me a one sentence judgement. That warning was for a different reason and was about 3 weeks ago, Plus, you didn't even inserted the "Last Warning" tag on that warning, which would clearly show that I would be blocked the next time I would do that. I have explained exactly what is wrong with J0-r3L's edit on the talkpage, and why he shouldn't change the article's edits. Yet, he still continued to revert it. So, what exactly should I do if the other opponent wouldn't want to cooperate? Stand here and let him do his undecided edits, No! Obviously, I would revert his unjustified edits and this process comes into a loop and starts the so called "Edit War". Yes, you will keep saying that I need to wait for an administrator to settle the problem, but administrators always takes a long time to come and solve the problem. But what can I do? Nothing. You're lucky because if "vandalisers" wouldn't want to cooperate with you, you can block them away. But what about us normal users? We don't have a choice but to keep reverting the other person's unjustified edits. Can I atleast request my block to be lifted up.

Decline reason:

No warning is necessary when you edit war. 31 hours is not an especially long block period. You need to take an honest and serious look at Wikipedia:Edit war for tips on how to adjust your behavior but the most critical one is that you need to engage in discussion on the article talk page. Admins do not settle editing disputes, that is up to a consensus of editors. Consensus cannot form without discussing, and reverting reinforces the battle mentality and moves the situation away from resolution. If you are prepared to adjust your behavior feel free to bring it up in a new unblock request. Mangojuice^talk 20:31, 17 August 2009 (UTC) PS. I find it particularly disingenuous that you are claiming you weren't warned when (1) you were, and (2) you removed the warning from your talk page.

---

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.

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).

Witchy2006 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Yes, I was warned but that warnign is not about this one. And Mufka told me that it is fine to remove warns, block histories and such in your talkpage because it only signifies that you have read them. And this block was done for about a long time right after the edit war has stopped. My point is, what exactly is the purpose of this, if the edit was has already been settled. For over 2 years of contributing with Wikipedia, this is the very first time that I was ever blocked. So, Yes, as long as it would please and keep everyone feel civilised, I am always willing to change my flaws to keep Wikipedia a peaceful information page.

Question, What exactly should I do if a "vandaliser" or person who keeps reverting edits doesn't want to cooperate? -Yes, I should tell an administrator. But most of the time administrators always ignores us or just take too long to come in and solve the matter.

Decline reason:

We don't approve unblock requests with out-and-out lies in them. This is not your first block. Smashville^talk 21:32, 17 August 2009 (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.

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).

Witchy2006 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Wow, and you call yourself an administrator? There really are a very little "real" and "honest in their work" administrators here. My detailed explanation was again given a one sentence response. Can you please explain your decline reason for me. And yes, as far as i can remember, this is my first block for 2 years in Wikipedia, I dont remember being blocked before.

Decline reason:

You were warned that there is a rule against edit-warring, and that edit-warring can lead to a block. You broke the rule by edit-warring. The consequence of that is a block. When the block expires, you are welcome to return to useful editing. You've asked for a review of this block, and since I am the fourth independent administrator to review your request, your block has now been fully and fairly reviewed. For that reason, to avoid wasting the time of administrators, I've disabled your ability to edit this talk page for the rest of your block. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:52, 17 August 2009 (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.

Orphaned non-free image (File:Dyosalogo.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Dyosalogo.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 05:29, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Tiagong Akyat

A tag has been placed on Tiagong Akyat requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Durova³¹⁸ 16:33, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MalignoSmaller.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MalignoSmaller.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:39, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Better source request for File:AgimatRamonRevilla.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:AgimatRamonRevilla.jpg. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. Rockfang (talk) 01:49, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:GBnewBs.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:GBnewBs.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:47, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:GBnewBs.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:GBnewBs.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:38, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:UrbanZoneShow.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:UrbanZoneShow.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ɳorɑfʈ ^Talk! 16:21, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:UrbanZoneShow.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:UrbanZoneShow.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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:02, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:NatutulogPaAngDiyos.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:NatutulogPaAngDiyos.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:24, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Starcinema.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Starcinema.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:46, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Family guy TMWTB.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Family guy TMWTB.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:48, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Prinsesa ng Banyera.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Prinsesa ng Banyera.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:07, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:EvaFonda.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:EvaFonda.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:28, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MalignoSmaller.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:MalignoSmaller.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:33, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:WendyBruceMargaritalogo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WendyBruceMargaritalogo.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:47, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:KokeyLogo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:KokeyLogo.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Coyote wadi (talk) 11:05, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Abt Ur Luv for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Abt Ur Luv is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abt Ur Luv until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

—TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:29, 15 October 2023 (UTC)