User talk:Bettifm

Please do not add or change content, as you did to Christchurch, without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.-gadfium 08:32, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Rotorua. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -gadfium 06:16, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Hamilton, New Zealand. -gadfium 20:47, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bettifm, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Bettifm! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Osarius (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:08, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited TV2 (New Zealand), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fast and Loose. 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) 09:16, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

TV2 (New Zealand)

added a link pointing to Six Feet Under

TV One (New Zealand)

added a link pointing to Six Feet Under

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:56, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. gadfium 05:45, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

November 2014

Hello, I'm Widr. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Seven Network because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Widr (talk) 09:05, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (2015 in Australian television) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating 2015 in Australian television, Bettifm!

Wikipedia editor I dream of horses just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

I added {{new user article}} to the article in hopes you'll eventually complete the article.

To reply, leave a comment on I dream of horses's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Disambiguation link notification for December 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

1995 in New Zealand television

added a link pointing to Mirror, Mirror

1997 in New Zealand television

added a link pointing to Susan Wood

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2016 in British television, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Happy Valley and House of Fools. 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) 08:58, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of 2016 in Australian television

Hello Bettifm,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged 2016 in Australian television for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Lemonmelonsuperstar (talk) 07:51, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of 2015 in Australian television

Hello Bettifm,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged 2015 in Australian television for deletion, because it's too short to identify the subject of the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Lemonmelonsuperstar (talk) 07:54, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Climate data

You keep adding climate data but not including sources, and when you do add sources they are sometimes not for the location. For example, you added climate information to Waiouru but the reference is for Rangiora. You addded to Hastings, New Zealand without a source, and some of the figures match those produced by NIWA for Napier. Please immediately go and fix the reference at Waiouru, and ensure you use correct references in future.

If you are unable to provide such references, your edits will continue to be reverted and you will be blocked again.-gadfium 01:05, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Breathless (TV series), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages UTV and STV. 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) 08:58, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of serial killers by country, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Terry Clark. 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) 08:59, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of And & Dec’s Saturday Night Takeaway

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as And & Dec’s Saturday Night Takeaway, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. The page has been nominated for deletion, in accordance with Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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. AmaryllisGardener ^talk 02:25, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dannevirke, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Napier and Gisborne. 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) 08:59, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2015 March newsletter

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Freikorp (submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Godot13 (submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.

In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:

Cwmhiraeth (submissions) took Bumblebee, a level-4 vital article, to Good Article;
AHeneen (submissions) worked-up the Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 article, also to Good Article status;
Rodw (submissions) developed an extremely timely article to Good Article, taking Magna Carta there some 800 years after it was first sealed;
And last but not least, Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points) worked up a number of Featured Pictures during round 1, including the 1948 one Deutsche Mark (pictured right), receiving the maximum bonus due to the number of Wikis that the related article appears in.

You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email)

Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mayor of Masterton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thomas Jordan. 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) 09:07, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mayor of Carterton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Booth. 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) 09:25, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ron Mark, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Booth. 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) 09:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Shae Brider for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shae Brider 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/Shae Brider until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Mattlore (talk) 20:25, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Climate of New Zealand

Your addition to Climate of New Zealand has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. -gadfium 22:16, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Easter!

File:Chocolate-Easter-Bunny.jpg

All the best! "Carry me down, carry me down; carry me down into the wiki!" (talk) 04:59, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Nigel Latta Blows Stuff Up

Hi, I'm Lstanley1979. Bettifm, thanks for creating Nigel Latta Blows Stuff Up!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Hi - could you possibly add some more information to this article, please. If you are waiting for the programme to start, please try using a sandbox to construct an article and move it once it's in a shape likely not to be deleted. Thanks.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. LouiseS1979^(pigeonhole) 09:12, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Decades in Colour for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Decades in Colour 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/Decades in Colour until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Jbh (talk) 10:57, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand English

I've noticed a number of edits from you recently where you change spelling from New Zealand English to other forms, such as "colour" to "color" and "organisation" to "organization". Please read WP:TIES and WP:RETAIN. We use the national variety of English on articles closely related to a country, and we preserve the original author's variety on an article which is not closely related.

Also, please do not change the titles of references even if you think they are wrong. For example, at Kiwi you changed a title "Survival of brown kiwi exposed to 1080 poison used for control of brushtail possums in Northland, New Zealand" to "Survival of brown kiwi exposed to 1080 poison used for control of brush tail possums in Northland, New Zealand", but the reference uses "brushtail" as a single word.

Finally, it isn't necessary to keep giving me awards. You can reply to me on this talk page if you wish.-gadfium 19:23, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your RfA

I deleted your RfA. My ostensible basis was the same as the last one you tried to start on March 2: malformed. Putting that aside, you should not even be considering running for administrator at this point in time. Honestly, I question the judgment of someone so inexperienced with barely over 600 edits who's been blocked once in the short time they've been here self-nominating themselves to become an administrator. Next time you think about doing this, do yourself a favor and consult with an administrator you know and obtain some advice as to whether starting your own RfA makes any sense.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:35, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bettifm, have you seen Wikipedia:Advice for RfA candidates? It has some advice about self-nominations. If I were you, I would certainly remove the statement "Soon i will become a Administrator" from your user page, because having that there will certainly be enough reason for some editors to block your application. Schwede 66 05:26, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

George Hudson (entomologist)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of George Hudson (entomologist), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: George Vernon Hudson. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 06:45, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chicken Tikka Masala

Dear Bettifm, thank you for your edit of chicken tikka masala. As statements in Wikipedia need to be verifiable please cite the sources that prove that the dish is definitely from India and not of uncertain origin (as per refs already in this WP article). We're looking forward to this new evidence. Best wishes Guffydrawers (talk) 15:41, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of When We Go To War

The article When We Go To War has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:TOOSOON at best; recreate when it meets WP:NOTABILITY

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boleyn (talk) 16:36, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of When We Go To War for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article When We Go To War 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/When We Go To War until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Boleyn (talk) 09:10, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (David Beatson) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating David Beatson, Bettifm!

Wikipedia editor Newrunner769 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Needs content, refs, and some citations when you have enough text.

To reply, leave a comment on Newrunner769's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Proposed deletion of David Beatson

The article David Beatson has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Wgolf (talk) 00:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Concerns

A couple of other editors have expressed concerns about the quality of your edits. I share their concerns and have warned you before. You have made changes to spelling and grammar which are not correct, you have added unsourced material to articles, you have added copyrighted material to articles, and you have created articles on subjects which are of dubious notability. In short, you are creating work for other editors who have to clean up after you. You can see the discussion at User talk:Gadfium#Bettifm. Please stop making spelling and grammar changes to articles, and do not create any further articles except through the Wikipedia:Articles for creation process.-gadfium 02:40, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited David Beatson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Broadcaster. 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) 11:22, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New articles

Hello Bettifm. Thank you for contributing the new article Westside (New Zealand TV Series). The article lacks supporting references and sufficient information to demonstrate that it is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. Please read the advice in the Wikipedia:Articles for creation section and start new articles as a draft, moving them into the main Wikipedia space only when they have references and a good amount of content. This will reduce the frequency with which these new articles are questioned by ensuring they reach a reasonable quality level before going public. Many editors will gladly review your drafts of new articles before they go live and will offer friendly advice to help you. Best wishes Guffydrawers (talk) 10:35, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Westside (New Zealand TV Series)

The article Westside (New Zealand TV Series) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Dubious notability, but definitely too soon.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Schwede 66 21:29, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I have blocked you for another week for removing the AfD notice from When We Go To War. You appear to be ignoring messages posted to your talk page which try to improve your editing on Wikipedia. This is likely to result in an extended block. Please respond to these posts and try to take account of the advice you have been given.-gadfium 09:23, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I repeat my advice to stop creating stub articles on subjects of marginal notability such as Fresh (New Zealand TV series). Use WP:AfC for such articles rather than creating them directly, so they get some oversight before being placed in the direct public view.-gadfium 09:29, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Fresh (New Zealand TV series)

Hello Bettifm,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Fresh (New Zealand TV series) for deletion, because it seems to be an article that was created in violation of a block or ban. Content created by banned users will be deleted immediately.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Roshan014 (talk) 11:42, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of One News at Midday

Hello Bettifm,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged One News at Midday for deletion, because it seems to be an article that was created in violation of a block or ban. Content created by banned users will be deleted immediately.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Roshan014 (talk) 11:43, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

April 2015

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|I'm never a sockpuppet im want to edit more pages on wikipedia~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 05:23, 20 April 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

I'm never a sockpuppet im want to edit more pages on wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bettifm (talk • contribs) 01:42, 20 April 2015‎

Decline reason:

Clear, CheckUser confirmed abuse of several accounts. —DoRD (talk) 16:34, 20 April 2015 (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).

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

Request reason:

I have a bright furture on Wikiepdia because i haven't created anymore Sockpuppets. I'm trying to be Better. Bettifm (talk) 01:21, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Block evasion as User:The Kiwi Lad as recently as yesterday does not exactly lend credence to your claims. Yunshui ^雲 _水 07:15, 24 September 2015 (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 might be confused on this but I thought that sockpuppets were okay so long as they weren't abusive. Is there evidence that this user's 2nd account was abusive? And can we be sure that they are definitely the same person? Or is this a school student or otherwise is using the same IP address as someone else? The stated reason for the block, in relation to the removing of an AFD notice, was something that I think was done in good faith, per WP:Assume Good Faith, and that they were just trying to be a bit bold (per WP:BOLD) with it, and I think that we over-reacted a bit with the permanent ban. They don't look like a disruptive editor to me, and I think that such actions should be reserved for only the very worst people that use Wikipedia. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 12:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Was the sock puppet someone other than Tamaora, who was admitted on their user page as being a "sister editor"? The Tamaora account is not in violation of Wikipedia's sock puppet policy. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 00:26, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Mister Sneeze A Lot: This discussion is over. If Bettifm wishes to request an unblock, he may do so. Your championing his cause is unhelpful. Any more comments from you will be reverted. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:30, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support unblock

It looks to me like Bettifm was blocked for removing the AFD notice for the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/When_We_Go_To_War , which, in comments, it is universally agreed should never have been nominated for deletion, and the person who nominated it even withdrew the nomination. I think that Bettifm was probably just being a bit forceful with doing the right thing here. Per the policy WP:BOLD, I think that we should excuse that action. I think that we jumped the gun a bit on this person who otherwise looks like a good editor. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 05:32, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The more I look into this, the worse it looks. It looks like User:Gadfium had become convinced that Bettifm was a novice editor who needed a lot of mentoring, but then, rather than try to mentor Bettifm, they did a CheckUser on them and found that their confessed "sister account" used the same IP. I am wondering if Bettifm and Tamaora are brother and sister in real life? Is that what sister editor means? Either way, they were not disguising that, so I don't think that there was any violation of WP:SOCK. It would be different if they were supporting each other on an AFD or otherwise gaming the system. They weren't. In the latest effort, yes, Bettifm did the wrong thing by removing an AFD notice. But all Bettifm was doing, if you saw his edit summary, was to say that he didn't agree with it. Bettifm was using the Wikipedia policy WP:BOLD and we are supposed to encourage that. Sure, removing an AFD is not allowed, so enforcing that rule with a 1 week block is reasonable. But not an indefinite ban. This guy is a long-term editor with a lot of good edits. Wouldn't it be better to mentor him and help him out rather than just get rid of him? If Tamaora is his sister, isn't it a problem if we have removed someone he brought to experience Wikipedia in good faith? The policy of WP:Assume good faith applies, I think, and I would prefer to see him brought back, after a week, with mentoring. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 15:12, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bettifm, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 19:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I am not jumping the gun in stating that it conclusively said that we are unrelated and are in entirely different countries. I also provided a reason for why I supported you, someone I didn't know: because your situation was similar to a situation that I dealt with previously, which upset me a lot because of how unfair it was, and led to me retiring that account due to wikistalking. The sock puppetry case was initiated by me, to prove that I was not related to you, so that your case could be fairly investigated without the false accusations of sock puppetry associated with it. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 00:25, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You too Bettifm (talk) 15:14, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You created an empty unblock request, which I've removed. If you want to request an unblock, you must fill out the template with a reason.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:29, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Eruption (film)

The article Eruption (film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable television film, per WP:NF

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BOVINEBOY2008 00:32, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]