User talk:Jester66/Talk Page Archive 12

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Jester66. 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.

Disambiguation link notification for April 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Benjy Hawk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Peter Blake. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:06, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:HaydenPanettiere-Lizzie Spaulding GL.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:HaydenPanettiere-Lizzie Spaulding GL.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. James086^Talk 06:17, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Crystalhunt-lizziespaulding.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Crystalhunt-lizziespaulding.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. James086^Talk 06:19, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Step vs. legal father

Hi there! I'm not sure if you watch Y&R or not but, if you do, then you'll know that Neil Winters is not Lily's step-father, he's her legal father. The situation surrounding Shawn & Bo Brady is 100% the exact same so if you could stop incorrectly changing them to a step-relation, that would be appreciated. Thank you muchly.Cebr1979 (talk) 23:03, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Katherine Chancellor

Why do you always change it to see the character's last appearance was in May? It wasn't! It was in September! She was at her own funeral!!! Have you not seen the episode? Cebr1979 (talk) 00:03, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

There have been TWO credible sources that state her last appearance was in May, stop turning this into an edit war. Jester66 (talk) 03:12, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

June 2015

Your recent editing history at Katherine Chancellor shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. — TAnthony^Talk 16:04, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, once I saw where the Katherine Chancellor edits were headed, I warned you both so it would stop before anyone got themselves into trouble. I have obviously witnessed your edits and general behavior in the past and know that you are a calm and levelheaded editor. Cebr1979 has seemed to me lately to be a very volatile editor, so I had a feeling he/she might actually break 3RR, and unfortunately that did happen. FYI, I reported Cebr1979's violation and also left a warning on his talk page about his personal attack on your talk page, as well as a constructive note about the tone of his recent edit summaries. We have all experienced frustration at times in this collaborative environment, and I'm hoping that Cebr1979 can learn from this situation and we can all edit harmoniously in the future.— TAnthony^Talk 18:24, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Let's hope so TAnthony, but from the history of Cebr1979's talk page. I am not so sure about that will happen. Jester66 (talk) 20:16, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm loving (sarcasm) this conversation that's all about the editor and not the edits... Even the ANI board saw right through your tactics. If/when something happens again, I have this conversation to link back to. You are both being ridiculous.Cebr1979 (talk) 07:50, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

It's interesting how you latch onto one policy to condemn other editors' behavior (you've quoted "all about the editor" more than once) but ignore the ones that you break. We discussed your inappropriate behavior, which overshadowed your edits in this situation, and there is no prohibition from discussing other editors in this context! We have remained civil, constructive and even positive about a harmonious future, while your comment(s) are, as they often are, antagonistic. You have been warned about your tone by others and I wish you would treat WP more like a business environment and less like a chatroom.— TAnthony^Talk 12:08, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

LolCebr1979 (talk) 19:49, 16 June 2015 (UTC)