This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Archives

1

You Stop It! Because Becky and Luke is break up on May 2018 then can’t close friend. By Zainkhann. Zainkhann15 (talk) 20:58, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Zainkhann15: First of all, you did not have any sources to support the added information. Secondly, please follow Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines and I would recommend you to read Wikipedia:Consensus. ImmortalWizard(chat) 21:01, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and Happy New Year!

Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup, the competition begins today. If you have already joined, your submission page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and we will set up your submissions page. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2019, and which you have nominated this year, is eligible for points in the competition, the judges will be checking! Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:14, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ImmortalWizard. You have new messages at WP:PERM.
Message added 22:21, 1 January 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

 Swarm  {talk}  22:21, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are Welcome

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:56, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	For your contribution to pro-wrestling related articles Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:25, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ImmortalWizard! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place ((helpme)) on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! ImmortalWizard(chat) 18:54, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply] Getting Started Contributing to Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Directories and indexes Where to: ask questions • make requests Tip of the day Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper) Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Unbeknownst me, I logged in through an IP of a "colocation web host". I apologise and I will cautious next time. The block will expire in 2020 but I want to be unblocked right now and edit peacefully. Thanks! ImmortalWizard(chat) 10:16, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

We can better look into this if you provide the IP address, but it sounds to me as if you will need to log in at a different physical location or otherwise not use a web host if you want to edit. 331dot (talk) 10:34, 10 January 2019 (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.

Doug Weller sorry for the random mention but I wanted to notify the admins about my unblock request. I want to be unblocked ASAP. ImmortalWizard(chat) 10:31, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem, but 331dot is correct. Without the IP address you used we can't help you. Your account isn't blocked so you can't be unblocked. Doug Weller talk 11:06, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

331dot it's all fine now in my regular devices. ImmortalWizard(chat) 14:06, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all of his book written by various writers! Don't change it! Google or Facebook it copying by book name whether it's his book or not! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrittika.mehjabin (talk • contribs) 19:35, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dean Ambrose, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Big E (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Brother this is his Bengali book written by Various writter about his career! I gave all the source! Don't undo! This is for only Bengali fans who ever want to know about his book! It is easy to find book name in wikipedi! So don't change it! This is request — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrittika.mehjabin (talk • contribs) 16:39, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Brother this is his all significant book written by his permission and published in Bengali international book fair! Given all official website link! This is not fake books or vandalism! So nothing much too worry! I gave it all the official site link! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrittika.mehjabin (talk • contribs) 16:50, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ImmortalWizard, thank you for your recent GAN review of James A. Doonan. I found your thorough assessment of the sources especially helpful, as I ended up catching errors and omitted information because of it. Overall, I thought you were an effective reviewer and a pleasure to work with. Ergo Sum 20:42, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on List of international cricket five-wicket hauls at M. A. Aziz Stadium, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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 deleted 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. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:59, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Now you are certainly becoming disruptive with your WP:POINTY nominations. Those articles you've just tagged easily meet WP:NCRIC. If you continue with this, then you face being blocked. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:13, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Lugnuts: I have no point to prove. There is a discussion going on in WP:Cricket. I leave to admins. ImmortalWizard(chat) 13:14, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I appreciate your review for Matango. I often am reviewing sometimes more obscure films, so it takes them months (not quite a year yet!) to get the full review job. I appreciate you taking the time to read it and making it an even better article than it was before. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:15, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dean Ambrose you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MPJ-DK -- MPJ-DK (talk) 01:41, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Born and raised just outside of Copenhagen, but I now live in the US. MPJ-DK (talk) 00:02, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• I am a big fan of WWE, first wrestling shows I watched, but Lucha Libre is my passion for sure, hence why 99% of my work here is related to Lucha Libre. MPJ-DK (talk) 00:18, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Given your recent spate of odd edits and apparent vandalism I have blocked this account as likely compromised. Please review WP:COMPROMISED for how to proceed.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:34, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Ponyo I can really sorry. My account wasn't hacked or accessed by someone else. I shouldn't have done that. I have been editing for quite a while and I feel like one time vandalism was an error from me. My mind wasn't in a good state at that mind. I had repeated argumentive conflicts in WP:ANI and WT:CRIC. I simply snapped and went downhill. I promise I'll never do it again. There won't be any excuse the next time I get blocked. Again, I apologise. In the meanwhile, I will continue to do my GAR here on my talk page. At least impose cricket sanctions on me. Thanks.ImmortalWizard(chat) 05:51, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

While blocked, the only legitimate use of this page is to request to be unblocked; you can't use it for any other purpose such as GAR. Based on your statement here, it sounds to me that you need to remain blocked to protect Wikipedia from your snapping and going downhill again. You will need to better describe what you will do if you find yourself in a dispute with another editor so that you do not snap again in the future. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 11:56, 22 January 2019 (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.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

331dot I don't want to get unblocked only for GAR. I want to do other things good for the community. I take a vow that I will NEVER vandalize every again. I will prevent myself snapping by keeping a healthy discussion and not getting aggressive with others, even if they are aggressive to me. If I ever snap, I'll look for council in the village pump, help desk, teahouse, or any other place. I'll edit the same way I've been editing for the last couple of years (GAR, GA, FL, copyedit, fight against vandalism etc). I promise that I will NEVER fall in this dark side. I will assume good faith more frequently than ever before. If I find myself in disputed situations, I'll also try to take a break. I hope you understand my forgiveness and you are ready to unblock me. Wikipedia has become a huge part of my life and I don't want to depart with it. I understand why I was blocked and would never make the same mistake again. ImmortalWizard(chat) 13:04, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your account is apparently not compromised. However, I don't really trust you. Your pings are not working (see Help:Fixing failed pings), but please keep in mind that mass pings are a disruptive use of your talk page. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:39, 25 January 2019 (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.

• For the reviewing admin: I took a quick look at the technical data, with Risker performing a more thorough check, and this does appear to be a case of "having a bad day" as opposed to a technical compromise/hack.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:31, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Confirming what Ponyo said. I might suggest that ImmortalWizard consider taking a bit of time away from the project, or focusing on areas that bring more joy to him, for a little while; many excellent editors don't take the time for this sort of self-care, and it can have some negative impacts for the person behind the username, not just the project. I would support an unblock. Risker (talk) 17:53, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Risker: Thanks a lot! It's quite hard to keep oneself away from Wikipeidia. I will try to edit less frequently (which I was planning anyways). I consider myself Wikipediholic and is aware of the pros and cons. Again, thanks for the heads up! ImmortalWizard(chat) 21:59, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• I have doubts about this editor. Before this recent vandalism spree, he added "I am not a homophobic as others say." to User:Jimbo Wales. When this was reverted, he restored it. Cullen328 removed it again and told ImmortalWizard to "go do something useful". ImmortalWizard's response was "LOL". ImmortalWizard followed this up with "What are u doing?" on User talk:WhatamIdoing. This vandalism spree does seem so out-of-character to me as it does to everyone else. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:27, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  @NinjaRobotPirate: Wales exclusively stated that anyone can edit his page and it's watched by thousands of volunteers. Also, the information was directly from him in a Quora question. I don't think that's a huge vandal. And WhatamIdoing had no problems responding to me and didn't feel attacked in any ways. I both had healthy conversations with both her and Wales later on. ImmortalWizard(chat) 07:46, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• It appears that the edits for which IW was blocked stem, at least in part, from having tried to engage with people at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket and a range of events surrounding that interaction. I would suggest that the cricket project talk page can, on occasion, be a quite frustrating place to attempt to engage - particularly, perhaps, the way that IW did so. I've gotten frustrated there in the past myself and have learned, for the most part, to avoid the sorts of discussion there which cause problems for me. I would suggest that IW has plenty to offer but should, perhaps, not edit WT:CRIC, other than as essential which might help deal with the sorts of frustration that can cause issues for anyone. Blue Square Thing (talk) 07:03, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  @Blue Square Thing: I would gladly listen to your suggestion. It would be best for me to stay from conflicts and focus more on copy editing and reviewing articles at auto pilot. I am convinced the hostile exchange of comments arose mainly because of my lack of discussion skills; this led to quite a lot of misunderstanding and misinterpretation among us. It's high time for me to develop methods to reach consensus, gain more editing experience and devote myself to the core policies and guidelines. Thanks for your understanding. ImmortalWizard(chat) 19:05, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• @Ponyo, 331dot, NinjaRobotPirate, and Risker: I have been blocked for over 24 hours and I understand that you cannot take any actions. However, I would like you to inform other admins to assess the situation as soon a possible. I know that I am visible at Category:Requests_for_unblock, but in my case, I think it's quite unique and I am awaiting for the review. I want someone to assess the situation so that I get to know how this will go. Again, apologies for troubling you and calling you out. If you think I don't have the right to do this, please let me know. Also, let me know if I can do other things to get reviewed faster (like notifying the arbitration committee etc.). I believe I have provided valid reasons to get unblocked. Thanks! ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:14, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Favonian, AGK, Courcelles, Widr, Oshwah, Vsmith, Laser brain, Paul August, Gadfium, GorillaWarfare, Joe Roe, Mkdw, Howcheng, Opabinia regalis, Premeditated Chaos, RickinBaltimore, SilkTork, Power~enwiki, Worm That Turned, BU Rob13, Callanecc, KrakatoaKatie, DGG, Doug Weller, DeltaQuad, Euryalus, Ks0stm, and Newyorkbrad:, sorry for the random mention but I might need your attention here. I don't want to "beg" for a review but my block falls under a "special situations" which is WP:COMPROMISED. Howevern it turned out that was not the case, but still it doesn't mean I get away for my sudden vandalism and disruption. I clearly regret my actions and I am awaiting for a review. Please notify other admins about this case. I want to be back editing again. Apologies for this mess but let me know if I am doing something wrong. ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:17, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• • I see you pinged me above, ImmortalWizard. I just want you to know that, as a personal practice, I separate the checkuser function (in which I determined your account was not compromised) from the review of unblock requests; that is, if I do one of those tasks, I don't normally do the other. I do hope that another admin reviews this in the near future, but it will not be me. Risker (talk) 19:51, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gorilla Warfare, Doug Weller, Oshwah and AGK my pings apparently failed but I don't see why NinjaRobotPirate "doesn't trust me". Before I make another unblock request, please let me know what could be done prior. ImmortalWizard(chat) 06:28, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't I just tell you that mass-pings are disruptive? Talk page access revoked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:37, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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 • • 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.

@Binod Basnet: As you can see I have been blocked and I am not allowed to use this page for review. Hopefully, I will be unblocked soon. Meanwhile, you can either wait for me to be unblocked (which I would appreciate!), or get a new reviewer for David Warner (cricketer). It's honestly up to you. Thanks! ImmortalWizard(chat) 21:48, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MPJ-DK: As you can see, I have been blocked. I could technically copy-paste all of Dean Ambrose on this page and continue editing; bu the admins issued not to. I hope you don't have any problem waiting for me to be unblocked. In the meantime, feel free continue your GAR. You might also like to get someone to copy-edit and fix per review on behalf of me. ImmortalWizard(chat) 21:52, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• I will continue the review and leave feedback over the next couple of days, I guess we'll see what direction this is going in by then and figure out next steps if need be. I am not rushing to close the review. MPJ-DK (talk) 23:21, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  @MPJ-DK: I can't help but I heard rumors that Andrade Cien Almas adviced Rush not to join WWE! Not sure how good Rush is but Andrade is awesome and is putting great matches with Rey Mysterio. ImmortalWizard(chat) 22:59, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Rush in my opinion is one of the most charismatic, natural heels out there, I am a huge fan and look forward to what happens in ROH. MPJ-DK (talk) 00:46, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• @MPJ-DK: Daniel Bryan of Smackdown and Tommaso Ciampa of NXT are the best heels right now IMO. I don't watch other promotions or indie wrestling unfortunately, but I am looking forward to AEW. You've got to watch the Rey Mysterio-Andrade matches on Smackdown. ImmortalWizard(chat) 16:53, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

---

UTRS appeal #23833 was submitted on Jan 25, 2019 23:39:40. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 23:39, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for email. I'm not sure why you contacted me since I don't appear to have been involved in the block, but you appear to have an activ UTRS anyway Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:43, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Having seen these edits [1] [2] we blocked this account permanently at SVWP. The user had been making edits in almost-Swedish and refused to acknowledge that there were any problems with his or her command of the language, also arguing that the warnings preceding the block hadn't been harsh enough and that there would have to be a policy or guideline explicitly stating the level of Swedish required not to be blocked. - Tournesol (talk) 09:11, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Tournesol: First of all, you did not block me BECAUSE of those edits. Those were AFTER the block and I have sincerely apologized the Hindi Wikipedia community. I clearly acknowledged that my level of Swedish is low. I helped adding sources to sv:Richard Feyman and created the article sv:Dean Ambrose. In my opinion, a page with some grammatical errors and proper sources are way better than those unsourced such as sv:Seth Rollins Yes, there were really minor errors with my language and others' involvement to fix those is not a problem. Admins cannot block users who have not violated policies. I having low level of Swedish does not mean that cannot edit SVWP. I started editing more cautiously after this issue was addressed to me. However, I was still blocked despite helpful and making good faith edits. When I tried to look for discussion, you admins abused the power and blocked me from editing there as well. I am still waiting for you to properly justify your actions with clear reasoning. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 21:08, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of this, you have edit wiki on several other languages with low level. Does that mean you should be blocked? THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 21:13, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To User:NinjaRobotPirate: So this user had an Unblock Ticket Request System request that is now closed. There is no information on this talk page explaining the outcome or request info (although he is still blocked so it’s obviously denied). I am curious about the circumstances regarding his request and the declination, since he was a member of WikiProject Pro Wrestling alongside me. I am requesting for an admin to open up his ticket and disclose the request information onto this talk page. Thank you. DrewieStewie (talk) 22:27, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See User talk:NinjaRobotPirate#I would like to know, too. If you want to know more than that, you need to email ImmortalWizard. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:28, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm DannyS712 (talk), and I just wanted to remind you that you have signed up to compete in this year's WikiCup! There are about 2 weeks left before the first round ends – if you haven't yet made your first submission, there is still time to start; if you have already started, keep up the good work. See your submissions page: here. Good luck!

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 07:33, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey sorry I had to remove this edit to Talk: CM Punk, but Wikipedia is not a forum and your post violated WP:TPG. StaticVapor message me! 22:15, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for notifying. Won't do that again. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 22:18, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article Dean Ambrose you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Dean Ambrose for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MPJ-DK -- MPJ-DK (talk) 18:40, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as WT:PW are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines, not for general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics, or statements based on your thoughts or feelings. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:09, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey mate, just have a query for you. I’d like to thank you for all your work on the Dean Ambrose article, but I believe that you have cut out a few of his notable moments. For example, beating John Cena clean, or that prior to his injury he was considered the "iron man" of the WWE. The article reads great, but I just think you're chopping a bit much away, even when there are other articles that could also do with some CE, like Seth Rollins and The Miz. I'd like to reach an consensus on what is considered notable enough to include. Cheers. Ducktech89 ^(talk), 17 February 2019, 12:46 (UTC)

@Ducktech89: Him beating John Cena has nothing to do with his career. The general audience would not understand what is so significant with a "clean victory". You can add the iron man part on the reception section, if it's quoted by Dave Meltzer or other notable journals. I would also like you to have a look at Talk:Dean Ambrose/GA1 to find out what the reviewer has to say. They even asked me to remove some of his US title defenses. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 12:53, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[3] Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:17, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. We needed Finish interpreter. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 12:23, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a joke...? You're "sister-in-law" hacked your account? (compromising it again) Dude, if you keeping getting yourself into these weird situations, you might just indef your way into one you can't get out of. Protect your account before you lose it. - wolf 03:08, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes a joke. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 06:12, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why joke about that? Are you trying to get yourself blocked? JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:54, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Of course not! Why would I do that after a hard fought unblock? What I discovered is that my "joke" is not funny and dangerous. I trust my sister in law by the way... THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 18:55, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ImmortalWizard,

I noticed you closed the AfD on the article above. Whilst it may be nice to notify people if you intend to userspace a draft that's in mainspace; as it's unsourced, and brought up at WP:AFD it may be prudent to simply WP:USERFY or draft the article yourself, if you intend to work on it.

In the meantime, I will add the small amount of sourcing to the page that I brought up at AfD. If you'd like any help with userfying, let me know. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:05, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ImmortalWizard! You created a thread called Ben Shapiro at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing ((bots|deny=Muninnbot)) (ban this bot) or ((nobots)) (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:03, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This [4] thread should be a good warning you need to reduce or eliminate your participation at AN and ANi. There is a good chance the next time you make inappropriate comments there will be a formal move to ban you from the page(s). Find an area you can improve the encyclopedia and stay off the drama boards. Legacypac (talk) 21:00, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop gravedancing. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 21:02, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[5] ——SerialNumber54129 21:08, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Serial Number 54129: ?? THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 21:09, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Serial Number's link to warnings about your behavior is spot on. I'm not gravedancing and you don't understand what that means if you think I am. Legacypac (talk) 23:42, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Legacypac:

• "A history of disputes with the blockee."
• "An established pattern of deliberate wikihounding of the blockee."
• "A repeated stated desire to see the user in question blocked, beyond the normal course of voting in a block/ban discussion."

All three applies to you. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 23:54, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Who is the blockee? When have I ever sought to have you blocked? What dispute do we have because I'm unaware of it. If you think I'm wikihounding you take it up at ANi because you will be immediately shut down for that baseless accusation. Legacypac (talk) 23:58, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

more baiting incoming (huh) THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 00:02, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Legacypac is right. You're inserting yourself all over the place in all kinds of discussions that have nothing to do with you, and generally creating more heat than light. You seem to have little understanding of policies and other terminology that you're referencing. Just as one easy example, you accuse Legacypac of gravedancing, when gravedancing is about smugly celebrating that someone else has been sanctioned or blocked. You have neither been sanctioned nor blocked, and Legacypac was not celebrating anything. He was making a suggestion as to how best to focus your energy, which you absolutely should take. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:20, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Premeditated Chaos: You have no right to defend Legacypac. Of anything, they are hounding me everywhere. I suggest you look at their actions. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 09:11, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And I have received enough advice and complaints. So thank you. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 10:28, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article Dean Ambrose you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Dean Ambrose for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MPJ-DK -- MPJ-DK (talk) 01:41, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

TonyBallioni (talk) 06:40, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
1,889		Neville (wrestler) (talk)	Add sources
732		History of WWE (talk)	Add sources
456		Rachael Ellering (talk)	Add sources
970		Bengalis (talk)	Add sources
4,718		Stephanie McMahon (talk)	Add sources
173		Culture of Bengal (talk)	Add sources
4,739		Stone Cold Steve Austin (talk)	Cleanup
756		Attitude Era (talk)	Cleanup
2,434		Mustafa Ali (wrestler) (talk)	Cleanup
1,175		History of Bangladesh (talk)	Expand
128		El Ligero (talk)	Expand
51		Names of Bengal (talk)	Expand
229		Bengali Hindus (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
230		Islam in Bangladesh (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
89		Bengalis in Pakistan (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
19		Kavigan (talk)	Merge
171		Bengali Hindu wedding (talk)	Merge
24		Eastern South Asia (talk)	Merge
2,228		Velveteen Dream (talk)	Wikify
1,107		Elias (wrestler) (talk)	Wikify
3,843		Big Show (talk)	Wikify
3		Anatoly Savenko (talk)	Orphan
6		Ananya Mishra (talk)	Orphan
2		Baghao (talk)	Orphan
496		Saurav Gurjar (talk)	Stub
15		Rob Schamberger (talk)	Stub
867		Illusion (company) (talk)	Stub
42		Andy Shepherd (talk)	Stub
1,106		The IIconics (talk)	Stub
255		Xia Brookside (talk)	Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 17:37, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
88		MJ Jenkins (talk)	Add sources
1,626		The Last Samurai (talk)	Add sources
16		Sam Muchnick Memorial Tournament (talk)	Add sources
1,019		DIY (professional wrestling) (talk)	Add sources
379		Deonna Purrazzo (talk)	Add sources
14		Abdul Mannan Syed (talk)	Add sources
496		Wesley Blake (talk)	Cleanup
347		The Authors of Pain (talk)	Cleanup
106		History of Bengali literature (talk)	Cleanup
425		ACH (wrestler) (talk)	Expand
53		1971 killing of Bengali intellectuals (talk)	Expand
552		Shawn Daivari (talk)	Expand
213		Assassination of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
365		Taslima Nasrin (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
116		Khondaker Mostaq Ahmad (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
27		WWF Canadian Championship (talk)	Merge
145		Bengali Kayastha (talk)	Merge
448		University of Dhaka (talk)	Merge
18		Mohammad Nurul Huda (talk)	Wikify
467		Dana Brooke (talk)	Wikify
8		Bipradash Barua (talk)	Wikify
5		Moyukh Chowdhury (talk)	Orphan
3		Ilaram Das (talk)	Orphan
6		Mawlana Abdul Jabbar Jahanabadi (talk)	Orphan
5		Vitthal Laxman Phadke (talk)	Stub
4		Benajir Ahmed (talk)	Stub
3		Mansukhlal Atmaram Master (talk)	Stub
11		Anwar Pasha (talk)	Stub
8		Sitaram Seksaria (talk)	Stub
20		Ahmed Sharif (talk)	Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 17:45, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ImmortalWizard. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Ananya Mishra, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: previous versions of the article contain claims of significance, such as winning notable awards. Thank you. SoWhy 11:26, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks for letting me know. I'll try to check the page histories more often. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 12:59, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

or I will block you from editing. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:07, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Floquenbeam: So how I collect? THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:08, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You don't. You find something productive to do, and do that instead. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:09, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Floquenbeam: how is it not productive? THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:10, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not going to play with you. With your long history of disruption, I don't have the patience of a saint. The vandalism, the "jokes" about your account being compromised, the stupid comments at ANI, the stupid polls.... just stop it. Stop it or you'll be blocked. This isn't a playground. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:15, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am tired of these edgy admins too. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:16, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Then go somewhere else. That would be for the best. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:19, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Same to you then. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:20, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll cut to the chase and then go do something else. The next time you do something disruptive, I will consider it the straw that broke the camel's back, and will block you indefinitely. As long as that is crystal clear, you're free to think whatever you want of me. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:24, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The way you get triggered is baffling to me. Seems you are desperate to block someone after all. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:26, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I posted this on the Jimbo talk page; I'll reproduce it here.

ImmortalWizard, I know you are offering this in good faith but I would suggest you drop it. There doesn't seem to be any point to the "survey" except your own curiosity. And I see that you have been threatened with a block for spamming this announcement onto multiple user talk pages. In the future, if you want to do something like this I would suggest you check with an experienced user or two, to see if it is a good idea. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:13, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MelanieN: @Floquenbeam: As a relatively new user, I would like to what went wrong. I think I am missing something and an explanation will be appreciated. How was it a "spamming" and disruptive? I also thought I can do whatever I can in my own userspace. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 18:56, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is, you didn't keep it to your own user space. You posted notices on a lot of OTHER people's user pages and that was annoying. And I would seriously advise that you stop trying to interact with Floq. Don't bother him. Yes, pinging him is bothering him. Don't try to resume the above discussion with him; can't you tell it was going badly?

You can ping me all you want; I have mentored people in the past that had a rough start here, people who are now respected and productive users, and I believe we can achieve that for you as well. But you do have to be willing to listen to advice. -- MelanieN (talk) 19:13, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK,

• First, 5400 edits since 2014 is a newbie?
• Second, I don't care what you do in your user space. The survey was fairly useless, but why would I care? The main problem was that you were pestering multiple editors to participate, and showed no indication you were going to stop asking more people. That is the definition of spamming; sending multiple unwanted messages.
• Third, that would have been worth a gentle note, except you've been very disruptive lately:
  • Intentional vandalism a month ago, to multiple articles, leading people to think your account had been compromised
  • Adding a dumb comment to Talk:Winston Churchill, then removing it, saying your sister-in-law wrote it. Then claiming that was a "joke". This was after you'd been blocked indefinitely for possible compromised account, and grudgingly unblocked.
  • Making the dumb proposal on ANI (where, by the way, you should not post for another year or so) that an established editors should be blocked for 2 months, and multiple other silly comments on that page on subjects you do not understand.
  • Diving headfirst into an edit war at Ben Shapiro, on an article you had not previously edited.

...and that's just in the last month's history of your talk page, I haven't looked back before that. So, as I said above, there is a certain "straw that broke the camel's back" aspect to all this.

• Fourth, acting all smug when you're warned about your behavior, insulting admins, arbitrators, and fellow editors who try to give you advice. And so far as I can see, never apologizing to them for it.

So, you see, it isn't that one incident only, it's your overall pattern of behavior. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:51, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly I have listened to all humble "advice" since I did something else other than ANI. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 20:01, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on User:ImmortalWizard/User survey 1 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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 deleted 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. ——SerialNumber54129 17:13, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the U5 tag. It does not apply, since part of the definition of U5 is that the user has "made few or no edits outside of user pages". -- MelanieN (talk) 17:23, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. However, like a picture, it says a thousand words. ——SerialNumber54129 18:59, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:ImmortalWizard/User survey 1

Hi ImmortalWizard! You created a thread called Closing discussion problem at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing ((bots|deny=Muninnbot)) (ban this bot) or ((nobots)) (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ImmortalWizard. You have new messages at Titodutta's talk page.
Message added 21:55, 26 February 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.[reply]

Titodutta (talk) 21:55, 26 February 2019 (UTC) +1. --Titodutta (talk) 22:21, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Wizard! I was surprised to see you doing GA reviews. That is something that is usually done by people who have done significant article creation themselves - which you haven't. (Eight articles in 2015-2016; no articles in 2019, just two lists.) I am not a GA reviewer myself so I can't judge if you are doing a good job at it or not. I looked at your most recent GA reassessment, Talk:Cody Rhodes/GA2, and was surprised at your saying that it did not have enough references; it looks to me like most of the article has a reference for every sentence, with the exception of one paragraph and the filmography section. I will ask someone who DOES do GA review to take a look and advise if they think you should be doing this or not. I see that one such user came by, looked at your review, and suggested you should be more specific in your complaints; you got a little more specific and told them you have done quite a few GA reviews, but I don't think that is true.

Please understand, I am not trying to hover over you or supervise you; I am just trying to advise you how to stay out of trouble, which can happen if you try to do things you are not qualified to handle. I don't want to see a bunch of people on your talk page screaming at you. -- MelanieN (talk) 07:11, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MelanieN I am very open to feedback from nominators or others after each GAN review. You can check all of them listen in my user page. So far, I haven't really gotten into troubles and I took all of them seriously and detailed comments. When it comes to reassessments, I do them a little bit different with much general comments, until some is willing to fix them and ask for more. I am very critical with delisting GAs. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:58, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You should know that I have gotten private comments from three or four people, saying they think you should not be doing GA reviews or GA reassessments. They are telling me, rather than criticizing you at your talk page, because they know that I have volunteered to mentor you and advise you. I do think you should take this feedback seriously. My advice would be, when you come across a Good Article that needs work, just do the work and fix it to GA standards. I know that you have done that kind of improvement at least once before. Or put a notice on the article talk page saying "hey, folks, this article seems to have slid a little from its GA status, here are the problems." Rather than going immediately into a GA reassessment. I repeat: there are a LOT of people here who think you should not be evaluating articles for GA. You can take this advice or not, as you wish. But if you choose not to follow my advice, I won't be much help to you. -- MelanieN (talk) 18:10, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MelanieN doesn't really matter how many of them don't want me to review. To be precise, I have done my last eight reviews within a past couple of months. I would gladly listen to their advice if they can really check the reviews I made and explain to me what I should work on and what I am doing wrong. Otherwise, I will continue to review with quality. As far as I know, there are not really specific requirement to be a GAN reviewer. As long as you understand and refer to the criteria, you are good to go. It wouldn't be fair if someone comes to be like "Oh, your reviews are crap, you didn't listen to us, therefore you are blocked," without giving the "advice" with explanation. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 18:18, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK, then, when it comes to GA review you are on your own. And it looks like you don't really want to be mentored, so let's forget about that part. But do still feel free to ask me about anything and I will help as best I can. In particular I suggest that if you come up with some new thing you want to do (something like your survey), you check with me or someone, to see if it sounds like a good idea or a bad idea. -- MelanieN (talk) 19:28, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• So I did not send a message to anyone, but I am someone who is concerned about the GAR activities you are undertaking, on two fronts

• Seems to jump to GAR very quickly, some of the articles you submitted have a couple of minor issues that could have been tagged and then brought up on the talk page, if not addressed after a week or two and you cannot solve yourself THEN put it up for GAR. But that is not the behavior I see here.
• Inexperienced in GA, when I did the GA review of Dean Ambrose there were multiple GA criterias that were clearly not fullfilled before it was submitted for review, during said review you were happy to take instructions and do as I suggested, but saw very little initiative on your own or pre GAN work either. I've checked some of your GA reviews and they are grammar heavy, light or none-existent on all the other GA criteria, I honestly think your time would be better spent getting GA review experience before jumping into the reassessments.

• Just my personal take, do with it whatever you want. MPJ-DK (talk) 21:49, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MPJ-DK may I ask which GA reviews you looked at for your second point? THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 21:56, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• 1. 10-18 on your page, that is the ones that were not quick fails. MPJ-DK (talk) 21:58, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MPJ-DK So can you pick one and show me what I did bad? THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 22:01, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As I stated light or none-existent on all the other GA criteria. I believe that is fairly clear, there are other GA criteria than "well written" and I hardly see those addressed in the 8 reviews I looked at. WP:GACRMPJ-DK (talk) 22:06, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MPJ-DK but can you be specific? If that's the case, I can say the same about your Ambrose review THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 22:11, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MPJ-DK take a look at this, promoted by an "experienced" reviewer. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 22:14, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see, well this is where I tag out then. Have a good one. MPJ-DK (talk) 22:19, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Which of the "The six good article criteria" did I not address? A response like that really doesn't seem to indicate that you even grasp wha I am saying. like I said you mainly addressed "Well written", occasionally addressing "verifiable". So reviews I read seemed to skate by 4 or 5 of the criteria as such. MPJ-DK (talk) 22:18, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MPJ-DK u see, it's a community problem. At least I see myself better than quite a few. It would really helpful if u pick one of the GAN reviews and go through what went wrong. I need to sleep now. Maybe I tomorrow I'll try to evaluate which of the criteria I missed. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 22:28, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please add citation needed tags in the required places in the article Rahul Dravid, So that i can provide the citations rather than adding general citations needed tag to whole article. MRRaja001 (talk) 12:49, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MRRaja001: I have added some more tags. I am surprised to see it in such a bad shape. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 13:13, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning, Wizard. Somebody emailed me with a question about you. You have a userbox on your page saying that you have the rollback right. But you actually don't; your user rights are extended confirmed user and pending changes reviewer. You should remove that userbox. It is bad form to claim rights you don't actually have. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:29, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MelanieN I do have rights. Just now in a difference page I found these: [rollback (AGF)] || [rollback] || [rollback (VANDAL)] THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:32, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MelanieN I am actually confused, because Swarm rejected me here, which I never knew! I remember being notified that someone has changed my user log and since then I have those. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:37, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Wizard, just as an illustration, this shows both—you currently have the rollback buttons at the top, but your user box refers to the one below ("Rollback 2 edits"). Hope that helps! ——SerialNumber54129 17:43, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Serial Number 54129 hmm interesting. However, I do remember once having the bottom one as well and using it! Probably someone made a mistake at that time. So every extended user has the top one? THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:48, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wizard, you can easily check to see what user rights you have; it is a link on the "tools" menu on the left side of your user page. If you do get that user right at some point, you will have a "rollback" link activated. Anyhow, no harm done, just take it down. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:46, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removed. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:55, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ImmortalWizard! You created a thread called Verifying sources at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing ((bots|deny=Muninnbot)) (ban this bot) or ((nobots)) (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Natureium (talk) 19:38, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would stop responding to people on WP:AN/I. You should Make one last statement saying you will do a self-imposed topic-ban from AN/I for at least a 3 months. I just saw some of your responses, and it really makes you look Worse than you are. Please take my WP:ROPE. I don't want to see you get more severe sanctions imposed. All the best, ―MattLongCT -Talk-^☖ 20:21, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]