User talk:Cyberllamamusic

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions, such as your edit to the page Instant noodle, have removed content without a good reason to do so. Content on Wikipedia should not be removed just because you disagree with it or because you think it's wrong, unless the claim is not verifiable. Instead, you should consider expanding the article with noteworthy and verifiable information of your own, citing reliable sources when you do so. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

• Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
• Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
• Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
• No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
• If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
• Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
• Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Chaheel Riens (talk) 10:34, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Additional - "I don't like it" isn't a really valid reason for removal of article content... Chaheel Riens (talk) 10:35, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 2021

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Mande languages have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Mande languages was changed by Cyberllamamusic (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.899405 on 2021-04-13T12:50:28+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 12:50, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Adding to this line of complaint: I just needed to revert three of your recent edits because you changed well-sourced content without backing your edits up with new sources. This tells me that apparently you don't yet know the importance of sources for Wikipedia. We can only make changes if we have the sources that back up these changes. And we need to supply these sources. As long as we cannot do that, existing content needs to stay in place, even if we know this content to be wrong. Please read up on reliable sources before you make any other edits to Wikipedia. If you continue like this, now being warned by the third editor, you will quickly lose your editing privileges. Don't let it come to this. Landroving Linguist (talk) 07:03, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia. ElKevbo (talk) 00:02, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:54, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Lithuania, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:26, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Largoplazo (talk) 14:53, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you recently made a repeated edit to New Zealand asserting that it was a federal monarchy, and the language you used in your second edit summary was rather impolite. There are now several comments at Talk:New Zealand relating to your assertion, to which you are invited to reply. In particular, you need to produce some reliable sources to justify your assertion; if you are unable to do so, then it would seem that you owe Chipmunkdavis an apology for your intemperate language. Murray Langton (talk) 17:15, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Changing facts to what you wish them to be, as you did here and here, is highly disruptive. Please stop it! --T*U (talk) 10:54, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some advice: looking back over your edits to Wikipedia over the last few months, I see that quite a lot of them have been reverted. In many cases, this is because you have added or changed information without providing any reliable sources for your edit (in some cases you have quoted a source but have apparently misunderstood that source). I may be misinterpreting your actions, but in a number of cases it appears that you have just made a change on the basis of your opinion, which is not how Wikipedia works. You have also been warned twice about apparent vandalism, which can lead to being temporarily blocked from editing.

Perhaps you should rethink your approach to editing Wikipedia. I note that you have been provided with some links to articles about how Wikipedia works, right at the top of this talk page. It might be a good idea to read and think about at least the first two. I do hope that you will become a positive contributor to Wikipedia. Murray Langton (talk) 22:16, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Cyberllamamusic, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Introduction tutorial
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need personal help ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome.  CMD (talk) 14:51, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing, treating WP like a forum or blog, some outright vandalism, unsourced content, almost all edits are reverted and very few make any sense, no response to multiple people leaving message on user's talk page, just... enough..

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Floquenbeam (talk) 17:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

why you block me forever? please make a 1-year block please

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Please I want to make a 1-year block because the indefinite block was very undeserving for me, and I will change my behavior forever. why treating WP like a forum or blog is an indefinite block?Cyberllamamusic (talk) 17:43, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

User agreed to a 1 year block with no talk page access. This unblock request is now moot. Floquenbeam (talk) 18:26, 10 May 2021 (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.

I said, very clearly, that you were blocked for seven things: "disruptive editing, treating WP like a forum or blog, some outright vandalism, unsourced content, almost all edits are reverted and very few make any sense, no response to multiple people leaving a message on user's talk page". It was not just one thing, and it was only after lots of warnings and suggestions and advice that you chose to ignore. I see no reason to believe you will change your behavior forever. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:52, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Floquenbeam: Where is the advice that I will reply to that point? please find the proof. please get a 1-year block only. your blocking was the severest form, that's a questionable idea.Cyberllamamusic (talk) 17:59, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the advice? There are seven separate people who have left you messages above. I'll change your block to a 1-year block - with no talk page access - if you want, but if you return in a year and do the same kind of thing, you'll just be immediately reblocked again. Do you want your block changed to be for 1 year with no talk page access, or do you intend to request an unblock? --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Floquenbeam: Yes! I want to block changed to be for 1 year with no talk page access, and my decision will be made soon. by the way what the block for the talk page access works including my talk page ones?Cyberllamamusic (talk) 18:17, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand what you're asking, your current block prevents you from editing all pages except this one. If I remove talk page access, then you won't be able to edit this page either, for 1 year. Is that what you want? --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:21, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Floquenbeam: Sure, that's it!Cyberllamamusic (talk) 18:24, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:27, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mande languages

In Mande languages you asked

(who someone uses the question mark on this language family please somebody help!?)

The question-mark on "Niger-Congo?" means: it is uncertain whether or not the Mande languages belong to the Niger-Congo languages family (but it is less likely that they belong to any other family).

Better to ask such a question in Talk:Mande languages than in the article itself. —Tamfang (talk) 17:59, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think in my opinion the Mande language should separate from the Niger-Congo language family because there is evidence that the language was using a script and the vocabulary is not similar at all. this was my answer.Cyberllamamusic (talk) 18:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Use of a script is not evidence for or against kinship; all recognized language families are older than writing, and scripts have been adapted between unrelated languages many times. —Tamfang (talk) 02:20, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamfang: ...with emphasis on 'recognized' or 'natural'. There are also some artificial languages, which have come to existence together with their scripts (Klingon, Loxian, Quenya...). --CiaPan (talk) 06:20, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

block evasion

The IP identified here is obviously you. You, the person, are blocked; you are not allowed to edit via IP address instead. I have blocked that IP address for a week, and if I see you're doing it again, the block on this account will be restored to indefinite. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:04, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Technical evidence confirms that you have continued to evade your block as Yourairport. I have upgraded the block to indefinite. --Blablubbs (talk) 14:41, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #59449

is closed. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:25, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]