This is an archive of past discussions with User:Curtis23. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to The Bash (2009), is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. TJSpyke17:54, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
STOP. You are hurting the article and making it look ugly by putting in WAY too many pictures. Only a handful of pictures are needed, not every match wrestler participating needs to have a picture in the article. Stop putting them back in. TJSpyke20:09, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
It's NOT helping the article. See the tag that you deleted for no reason, there is such a thing as article having too many pictures (which this article definitely has too many). It's hurting the article and makes it look ugly by squeezing the test (the IMPORTANT part of the article) together and making it look ugly. TJSpyke01:11, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Except the tag IS right. You may like putting way too many pictures in articles (which you admit), but you are wrong here. There are way too many pictures in the article and they WILL be removed (either by me or someone else). Not every match needs to be represented by a picture. Articles are not picture galleries. TJSpyke01:23, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
And you will be blocked for edit warring if others agree to remove the pictures and you keep removing them. Try taking a look at other PPV articles to see the correct way to do it (like Lockdown (2008), which is a Featured Article). No sane person could think the article looks good with all those pictures cramming the text and table together. I don't get how you can't see how you are hurting the article. TJSpyke01:34, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Darrenhusted (talk) 01:35, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
I regret to inform you that you've been blocked for 24 hours due to your edit warring. In the future, please discuss controversial changes on the talk page and pursue dispute resolution as needed. If you wish to contest this block, you may add {{unblock|Your reason here}} to your talk page. Heimstern Läufer(talk)05:10, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
The general rule is that PPV's don't get articles until they are about 2 months away (the exception being WrestleMania and Bound for Glory). There is no info that would go into the SS article yet and it would just be a stub. TJSpyke21:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
There is no info out there about the 2009 event. Create something on a testpage first and show that to some experienced editors. Articles are not test grounds. TJSpyke21:42, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Because WWE has not announced a "WrestleMania XXVII". They have not announced any PPV's after WrestleMania XXVI. Once WWE announces WrestleMania XVII, then a article on it can be created. Right now no such event even exists and would violate WP:CRYSTALBALL. Will it happen? Almost certainly, but you can't speculate. TJSpyke00:35, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
September 2009
About 2 1/2 months away and 3 PPV's before it (Breaking Point, Hell in a Cell, Bragging Rights). There is no info about the event other than date and location. TJSpyke18:40, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
A article has to be able to survive deletion the moment its created. At that point the article can be re-created, work on it in a subpage for now. TJSpyke18:47, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. I saw you've been in a bit of a dispute over an article on your userpage. It is in fact allowed for you to write articles in the userspace if they are works in progress, but usually, they are done as user subpages rather than on the main userspace (for example: User:Curtis23/Title). I don't think there's any rule against it being on your main userpage, but still, I strongly suggest using a subpage (keeps your userpage available for info on you). Also, if you do draft an article in your userspace, please don't put the page in any article categories (for example, this revision puts your userpage into the Category:2009 in professional wrestling, which is prohibited, as that category is only for live articles). One more thing: articles in the userspace are meant to be temporary, until they're ready for the article space, so if you keep them for a long time without working on them, they may end up deleted via miscellany for deletion. Hope this clarifies things a bit. Heimstern Läufer(talk)08:57, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I got use to doing FLs, I've got around 10 so far. Thought to be blunt, it sticks longer. My bad--WillC23:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Your recent edit to the page WWE Hell in a Cell appears to have added incorrect information and has been reverted or removed. All information in this encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable, published source. If you believe the information that you added was correct, please cite the references or sources or before making the changes, discuss them on the article's talk page. Please use the sandbox for any other tests that you wish to make. Do take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. Only the Cena/Orton, Punk/Undertaker, and DX/Legacy matches are in HIAC.TJSpyke05:33, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Why are you so insistent on making PPV articles extremely early? I do not want to have to go through this with you on every PPV. It's too early to start an article on the event. TJSpyke22:58, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
2 months away from the event. That would be mid-October for this event (since it's December 13). It won't kill you to actually wait, no would it hurt the article since it would just be a stub for the next few weeks anyways. TJSpyke23:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Warning
Do NOT post fake messages claiming I agreed with you. You very well know that I don't agree with the split of Curt Hawkins and Zack Ryder. RobJ1981 (talk) 23:01, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
WWE has not announced a Backlash 2010 event or a WrestleMania XXVII event, you can't assume they will happen (especially Backlash, considering WWE's love of re-naming PPV's lately). TJSpyke16:30, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Edit Warring
I am filing a complaint against your edits in Zack Ryder. This message to you is part of the process. If you do not respond to the complaints, and continue your unjustified reverts, it is likely you will be blocked from editing. avs5221 (talk) 21:37, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Curtis23. You have new messages at Avs5221's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, Curtis23. You have new messages at Avs5221's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
A note
Hi. Please note that while I'm not going to take action against you at the moment, any further disruption on Zack Ryder will lead to an immediate block. When involved in a dispute, please utilize discussion pages to come to a reasonable solution. Thank you. –Juliancolton | Talk02:40, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
One more revert on Mike Mizanin you will have violated the 3RR. Listen, the image you uploaded is copywritten. It is owned by the WWE and you have presented no proof that they have given you permission to use that image anyway we see fit. Thus we can not use a copywritten image that is not released under fair-use. Even if it was under a fair-use license, we have free-use images already available of The Miz, so we don't need it.--WillC21:30, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you.--ColdplayExpert23:13, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting it into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other articles that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 23:19, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:16, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Zack Ryder support
No. As I said on the page, the behavior behind the request prevents me from taking it seriously. Please also note that posting a message on a user's talk page asking them to support you is a violation of Wikipedia:Canvassing. Even if I did support the idea at this point, my input would be thrown out because of the canvassing. GaryColemanFan (talk) 00:35, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
This lists offers nothing new. There is no actual title, it's just 2 separate titles held together. Both title already have their own history lists here on Wikipedia.
I just wanted to kindly ask you to cool this Zack Ryder business, in time I'm sure he will establish himself enough to get his own page, and I do feel you are violating WP:POINT, I would hate to see a passionate editor such as yourself get thrown off Wikipedia for something as silly as this, so I'm just asking you if would consider dropping it and changing your Timestamp. AfroTalkie Talk - Afkatk07:12, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Seriously dude if you keep up violating WP:POINT by keeping that Zack Ryder stuff in your Timestamp, you're going to end up blocked and I would hate to see that happen. AfroTalkie Talk - Afkatk22:04, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
No such match between Mysterio and Undertaker has been announced for Royal Rumble. Before you try to say it, it was NOT announced at the SmackDown tapings (they already announced earlier on the show that the winner of Mysterio/Batista will get the title shot next week on SmackDown). TJSpyke01:54, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
RFA
I removed your RFA from the RFA page as you have yet to answer the first two questions. Looking at your talk page, I would suggest that you hold off on an RFA, as it is likely to fail. I hate to bring you the bad news, but the current standards of administratorship are pretty lofty these days. If you would like some coaching, feel free to go here. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:25, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
