User talk:BittersweetParadox

Hello, I'm Muboshgu. Your recent edit to the page Adam Frazier appears to have added premature information about a reported sports transaction, so it has been removed for now. The transaction is based on anonymous sources and/or awaiting an official announcement. If you believe the transaction has been completed, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:05, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kalon Barnes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Ross. 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) 18:07, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Bo Nix, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Specifically per MOS:GEOLINK, locations should not be broken up into consecutive links to the individual city, state and country. —Bagumba (talk) 13:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah there's nowhere in that style that says I can't do what I did so maybe just don't be such a prick?? Thomasbeem (talk) 21:03, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There you go princess I fixed it. Also idk why you said "welcome to Wikipedia" lmao I've been editing for almost a year Thomasbeem (talk) 21:05, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Mohamed Salah. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Per MOS:OLINK. Mattythewhite (talk) 12:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Thomasbeem! Your additions to List of NBA annual scoring leaders have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it's important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:

• Limited quotation: You may only copy or translate a small portion of a source. Any direct quotations must be enclosed in double quotation marks (") and properly cited using an inline citation. More information is available on the non-free content page. To learn how to cite a source, see Help:Referencing for beginners.
• Paraphrasing: Beyond limited quotations, you are required to put all information in your own words. Following the source's wording too closely can lead to copyright issues and is not permitted; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when paraphrasing, you must still cite your sources as appropriate.
• Image use guidelines: In most scenarios, only freely licensed or public domain images may be used and these should be uploaded to our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. In some scenarios, non-freely copyrighted content can be used if they meet all ten of our non-free content criteria; Wikipedia:Plain and simple non-free content guide may help with determining a file's elegibility.
• Copyrighted material donation: If you hold the copyright to the content you want to copy, or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license the text for publication here. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Copying and translation within Wikipedia: Wikipedia articles can be copied or translated, however they must have proper attribution in accordance with Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. For translation, see Help:Translation § License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 20:01, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh okay I added the citation, am I supposed to directly quote it Thomasbeem (talk) 05:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at User:Yankees10, you may be blocked from editing. Meters (talk) 23:12, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at Pantomime, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. You have been cautioned about overlinking. This edit was unacceptable. Most readers will know what "music" is. I strongly urge you to read MOS:OL and stop your disruptive editing. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:06, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Awe do you own Wikipedia? Cry more BittersweetParadox (talk) 23:26, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop MOS:OVERLINKing. It is disruptive and against our style guidelines. If you continue, it may lead to your loss of editing privileges. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

---

Request reason:

I believe my Wikipedia editing rights were blocked prematurely and without adequate consideration. I inadvertently overlinked the page “Pantomime.” While my intention was not to overlink, I acknowledge that many of the links I added were unnecessary. I have observed other pages with a higher number of links, which led to my misunderstanding.

The individual who reverted my edit did so in a manner I perceived as harsh. In response, I impulsively reverted the edit and left a comment that was inappropriate. I deeply regret this action and did not anticipate it would lead to the revocation of my editing rights.

I believe my contributions have positively impacted Wikipedia. I primarily focus on editing sports pages, particularly baseball, where I frequently update statistics to ensure they remain current. Often, I find that baseball stats have not been updated for over a month, and I take it upon myself to keep them accurate and up to date.

I understand the error of my actions and recognize the importance of adhering to Wikipedia’s guidelines. I respectfully request the reinstatement of my editing rights, as I am committed to making unbiased contributions that enhance the quality of Wikipedia.BittersweetParadox (talk) 01:51, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

It's not that I am unblocking you, it's that you have not been blocked and this template only gives the options of "accept" and "decline". Mind MOS:OVERLINK and WP:CIVIL, or you could end up blocked. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:04, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BittersweetParadox: Wikipedia is not like the rest of the internet. You will be blocked if there is any repeat of commentary such as "Awe do you own Wikipedia? Cry more" above (diff). The views of other editors must be considered respectfully, particularly when they are correct and they provide links to relevant guidelines. Any further overlinking will result in a block. Questions can be asked by replying here or at WP:Teahouse. Johnuniq (talk) 02:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop MOS:OVERLINKing, as you did tonight at John W. Henry. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:58, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BittersweetParadox: The reason your edit at John W. Henry was incorrect is that the linked text was "His parents were soybean farmers". The article is about a person who appears to have nothing to do with soybeans. A mention of his parents is incidental and standard procedure is that such words are not linked. If links like that were wanted, the software could be changed to automatically add them. However, they are not wanted. To avoid a block, you must not overlink. Johnuniq (talk) 05:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay that seems super nit picky but I won't do it again my bad BittersweetParadox (talk) 06:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Regarding nit picking, you may be right but you should be aware that people get very irritated by repeated changes against consensus. Editors have battled over many style issues causing a lot of disruption. Therefore, it is standard that any flare-ups are handled aggressively. Johnuniq (talk) 07:16, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider the purpose of linking. It is to help people reading about a topic on Wikipedia to easily find more information that may help them to understand that topic, but not about general topics that are either common knowledge or not helpful in understanding the topic at hand. You like to edit sports articles, so let's say that you are working on the Wikipedia entry about Babe Ruth. You want readers to understand Babe Ruth's life and career. You probably don't want readers to be distracted by a link in the article to, say, musicals, in the section that describes the slugger's supposed connection to No, No, Nanette. Yes, we link to the specific article, No, No, Nanette, but not to the general topic of musicals. If you take a moment to read MOS:OVERLINK, it gives a good description of when linking is, and is not helpful, based on years of experience by editors here. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:02, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I get it 👍👍👍 BittersweetParadox (talk) 18:04, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You did it again! and again today. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:40, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Exploding Kittens (TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tom Ellis. 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) 20:00, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Dairon Blanco (baseball). This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 00:36, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, BittersweetParadox,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Conyo14, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged Houston Astros Baseball Team for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. You may find our guide for writing quality articles to be extremely informative. Also, you may want to consider working on future articles in draft space first, where they cannot be deleted for lacking content.

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. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Conyo14}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Conyo14 (talk) 05:15, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I was trying to make a redirect to the main Houston Astros page but I messed up yes please delete it that's my bad thanks for pointing it out 👍 BittersweetParadox (talk) 05:29, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged an article you recently wrote about Negasi Zuberi because you label this living person a serial rapist in the lead section but do not explain this description by giving any details, other than a kidnapping, within the body of the article. I have started a conversation to discuss this on the article's talk page. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 22:00, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Cameron Dewe (talk) 22:13, 2 November 2024 (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:Reviewing pending changes#Requirements to accept an edit, when to accept an edit
  

Dr vulpes (Talk) 05:57, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John Blair Smith, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Minister.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:57, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for changing that, I didn't realize. My apologies BittersweetParadox (talk) 23:14, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion here. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 19:52, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The page Category:Super Bowl winning players has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared 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.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or 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. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:09, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So I'm confused here. How is this category supposed to be read. Is it like Category:NBA championship: winning players from Canada, or Category:NBA "championship-winning" players from Canada? If the former the speedy move was ok I guess but there must be a space on both sides of the ndash. If the latter, it is improper English. Championship-winning is used only with a hyphen and never an ndash. It would be like using an ndash in "Low-flying airplanes contribute to noise pollution." That would be dead wrong always. Hyphens join words and ndashes separate words/phrases. It seems to me that "championship-winning" is a compound word that must use a hyphen. You said that this was to conform to "Category:NBA championship–winning head coaches"... perhaps THAT is the category that should have conformed. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:44, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You been asked an important question here and you ignored it while adding more posts. You need to fix what you did here. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:00, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BittersweetParadox. Thank you for your work on University of Wyoming Athletics Hall of Fame. Another editor, MPGuy2824, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

this needs to be mentioned in the target page

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:59, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsubstantiated categories to articles such as Category:21st-century African-American sportsmen to D. J. Augustin. Please read WP:BLPCAT for a further explanation.--User:Namiba 17:24, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:NBA championship–winning players from Canada has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Omnis Scientia (talk) 10:10, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:NBA championship–winning players from Australia has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Omnis Scientia (talk) 10:11, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:NBA championship–winning players from France has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Omnis Scientia (talk) 10:11, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Misnomer. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 14:39, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BittersweetParadox. Thank you for your work on שभोजपुरी. Another editor, MPGuy2824, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

the first symbol isn't present in the target page

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:09, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BittersweetParadox. Thank you for your work on שוהי אותני. Another editor, MPGuy2824, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Is there good reason to have the hebrew translation of his name (and all the other language redirects)?

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:12, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Шохей Отані has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 3 § Шохей Отані until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:49, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Шохей Отани has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 3 § Шохей Отани until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:49, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect شوهي أوتاني has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 3 § شوهي أوتاني until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:49, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect शोहेई ओहतानी has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 3 § शोहेई ओहतानी until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:49, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect שוהי אותני has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 3 § שוהי אותני until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Vereinigte Staaten 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, at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2018_December_19#Vereinigte_Staaten. 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. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:06, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on アメリカ合衆国 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, at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_July_16#美国. 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. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:08, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية 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, at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2015_November_16#الولايات_المتحدة_الأمريكية. 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. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:09, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Estados Unidos da América has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 13 § Estados Unidos da América until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect 米国 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 13 § 米国 until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:13, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Соединенные Штаты Америки has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 13 § Соединенные Штаты Америки until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:14, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Соединенные Штаты has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 13 § Соединенные Штаты until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:14, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Les États Unis d'Amérique has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 13 § Les États Unis d'Amérique until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:15, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 13 § Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:20, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية 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, at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2015_November_16#الولايات_المتحدة_الأمريكية. 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. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:01, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not recreate redirects that have been deleted as the result of a past WP:RfD. This is the second time you've re-created this redirect, which was speedy deleted based on a past discussion (found here) that resulted in deletion. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect الولايات المتحدة has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 16 § الولايات المتحدة until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:14, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:NBA Cup–winning players has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:08, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:NBA championship–winning players from outside the United States has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Omnis Scientia (talk) 11:43, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect TicketSmarter has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 23 § TicketSmarter until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:39, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect ABA championship–winning players has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 23 § ABA championship–winning players until a consensus is reached. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:27, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect ABA championship–winning player has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 23 § ABA championship–winning player until a consensus is reached. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:27, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect ABA championship-winning players has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 23 § ABA championship-winning players until a consensus is reached. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:28, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect ABA championship-winning player has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 23 § ABA championship-winning player until a consensus is reached. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:28, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Giannis Antetokounmpo

added a link pointing to Nike

Ramón Hernández (third basaeman)

added a link pointing to Negro National League

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your permission "reviewer" (Pending changes reviewers) will expire on 00:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC). For most rights, you will need to renew at WP:PERM, unless you have been told otherwise when your right was approved. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion. Leaderbot (talk) 19:41, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Соединенные Штаты Америки has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 2 § Соединенные Штаты Америки until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:37, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Соединенные Штаты has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 2 § Соединенные Штаты until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:37, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect 米国 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 2 § 米国 until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rudy Regalado, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mexican.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:59, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've re-enabled this right without an expiration. There is an option to grant this temporarily as a sort of test, normally we expect the admin doing so to inform the user that it is temporary, but apparently they failed to do so in your case. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 09:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you. Please see MOS:OVERLINK- I see you have also been warned on this same issue within the past year, it would be wise not to continue on with this. Magitroopa (talk) 18:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Before adding a category to an article, as you did to Category:Tuberculosis deaths in Jamaica, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified according to Wikipedia's categorization guidelines. The category being added must already exist, and must be supported by the article's verifiable content. Categories may be removed if they are deemed incorrect for the subject matter. Thank you. ^SMason_Garrison 15:49, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you massively overcategorize Category:Tuberculosis deaths? ^SMason_Garrison 15:52, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so I have just spent a serious amount of time reviewing your edits to categories. Please review categorization guidance before creating or changing more categories. ^SMason_Garrison 16:15, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Please see WP:ANI#User:BittersweetParadox - Overlinking. Magitroopa (talk) 18:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, BittersweetParadox,

I see you are currently editing but you have yet to participate in the discussion on WP:ANI about your editing. It would benefit you to go to ANI and present your point of view. Ignoring a discussion doesn't cause it to disappear, it just means that editors reviewing don't hear your side of the story. I encourage you to at least acknowledge this discussion and respond to it and any allegations made. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:29, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please also stop using Template:Baseball year in prose text, as the usage instructions make it very clear to not be doing so. And again, it would be quite helpful for you to WP:COMMUNICATE with other users instead of continuing on with your editing and ignoring the issue(s) entirely. Magitroopa (talk) 21:02, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ok BittersweetParadox (talk) 05:29, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BittersweetParadox. Thank you for your work on Negasi Zuberi. Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia! Have a blessed day today!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 03:31, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Tungsten Arm O'Doyle has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 8 § Tungsten Arm O'Doyle until a consensus is reached. Rusalkii (talk) 05:14, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello BittersweetParadox,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged There is Still Life Left my Ghost for deletion, because it's a redirect that seems implausible or is an unlikely search term.

If you don't want There is Still Life Left my Ghost to 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. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 15:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why you restored blatant spam links from a blocked promotional account to AppleCare+, but I removed them again.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:06, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited José López (outfielder), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Habana (baseball team).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, BittersweetParadox

I edit here too, under the username Cremastra and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've asked for a discussion about the redirect 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest, Washington, D.C 20500, created by you. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 15 § 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest, Washington, D.C 20500.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Cremastra}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Cremastra (u — c) 22:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest, Washington, D.C 20500 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 16 § 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest, Washington, D.C 20500 until a consensus is reached. Cremastra (u — c) 00:46, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BittersweetParadox. Thank you for your work on Santo Domingo Stars. Another editor, MPGuy2824, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

not mentioned in target page

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:24, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain your reasons for these page moves of redirects to Jose Canseco? Why? what were you trying to accomplish or fix? wbm1058 (talk) 02:58, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to add the "é" to "Jose" to make it "José," but the page "José Canseco" already existed as a redirect to "Jose Canseco" even though José Canseco" should be the name of the main page because that is the correct spelling. So I was trying to fix it but I couldn't figure it out so I stopped before I made it worse. BittersweetParadox (talk) 03:09, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Before boldly moving a longstanding page of a well-known person like this, please always check the talk page for discussions about the matter. See Talk:Jose Canseco#Accent or no accent on the e in Jose. Also check the logs at the target page title to look for previous moves from that title: Main public logs

@ 21:38, 23 July 2009 Wknight94 moved page José CansecoJosé Canseco to Jose Canseco (His own web site doesn't even use an accent mark)

Given that discussion, and previous moves to and from that title, you should consider the move potentially controversial and follow the instructions at WP:RM to request a move, starting a discussion that will run for at least a week to find a consensus for or against the move.

And, when you find that page history is blocking you from easily making a desired move, do not juggle around redirects to the title in an attempt to clear the way for your move. Ask an administrator to help you. Thanks, wbm1058 (talk) 16:14, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I echo this. Please slow down and become familiar with the norms of the project. ^SMason_Garrison 16:17, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to know that you echo that! What a meaningful comment Mason! BittersweetParadox (talk) 13:41, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about you engage with the substance of the concerns by multiple users? The snark isn't helpful. ^SMason_Garrison 01:11, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved content from Vivian Malone Jones into Harlan Hobart Grooms. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content (here or elsewhere), Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 21:13, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited José Acosta (baseball), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oakland Oaks.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:52, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Rojo (baseball) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 3 § Rojo (baseball) until a consensus is reached. Rusalkii (talk) 22:25, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Nuevo Criollo has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 3 § Nuevo Criollo until a consensus is reached. Rusalkii (talk) 22:37, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BittersweetParadox. Thank you for your work on Rojo (baseball). Another editor, MPGuy2824, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

not mentioned in target page

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:20, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, BittersweetParadox. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 05:07, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but what is the point of this and all those other redirects? Can you please stop making more, for now? User:wbm1058, User:Cremastra, I think you two know more about redirects than I do--do you have an opinion? Drmies (talk) 22:56, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Hey--stop please. Drmies (talk) 23:00, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• You might check out this discussion, and think twice before making dozens more unnecessary redirects, before you risk getting topic banned for creating thousands of unnecessary redirects. Your user name implies to me that you're not serious about helping the project, and what I've seen of your edit history confirms it. If you truly want to help the project and are looking for more productive things you can do to help, I'd be happy to help guide you in a better direction and help ease the burden of the overload of tasks I see piled onto my plate. Feel free to ask. – wbm1058 (talk) 23:19, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Sorry if I hurt your feelings by ignoring you but they're not unnecessary redirects. There is quite literally a redirect category for the type of redirect I am making. You can't request someone stop making edits because you personally feel that the redirects are unnecessary. If that's how you feel, take it up with the people who decided to make that redirect category, not me.

  As for having me blocked, that is extremely embarrassing for you

  and a complete overreaction. I'm sorry I hurt your fragile ego but that isn't my problem, and if you're an admin then, quite frankly, you shouldn't be. Mind your own business because the redirects I was making were not disruptive or pointless, and they don't go against Wikipedia's editing policy. I suggest you get a life where you have more things to do than monitor a single experienced user's edits for almost an entire hour.

  Hopefully you figure out the root(s) of your insecurity. I suggest therapy. Good luck, I will pray for you. BittersweetParadox (talk) 23:26, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Hey wise guy, these fall under Wikipedia:Redirect#Reasons for deleting #8 If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name that is not mentioned in the target, it is unlikely to be useful. – wbm1058 (talk) 23:36, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Everything after As for having me blocked is exceedingly condescending and rude. Cremastra (talk) 00:32, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Well I wasn't talking to you soooooo BittersweetParadox (talk) 23:59, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Drmies (talk)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for to get your attention; you are mass producing redirects and have been asked to stop, but have ignored the talk page message. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Floquenbeam (talk) 23:16, 6 February 2025 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I was blocked for making redirects of pages sort names. I'm not sure how this violates Wikipedia's policy because there is literally a redirect category for redirects from articles' sort names. I didn't reply to the user that commented on my talk page because I was not doing anything wrong, so I wasn't going to give them the time of day. I'm sorry if that hurt their feelings, but blocking me because of making redirects to an existing redirect category is absolutely outrageous. Editors should not be blocked from editing Wikipedia simply because an admin's feelings got hurt.

Decline reason:

This was, to a tee, exactly the wrong answer. Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:22, 6 February 2025 (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.

(edit conflict) This is an excellent way to get me to change this to indefinite. Again, this is a collaborative encyclopedia. For any reviewing admin of any subsequent unblock request, do what you think best, but personally I think I would oppose an unblock at the moment, until more clue is demonstrated. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:24, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for inability to edit collaboratively with other editors.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Floquenbeam (talk) 23:28, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I no longer think an automatic unblock in 24 hours is best for the project. A convincing unblock request is needed. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:29, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By the way; you aren't blocked because of the redirects, as you say above. You're blocked because you ignored someone disputing them. You cannot make mass edits and ignore people asking you to discuss first. Floquenbeam (talk) 23:33, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dude he literally gave me 15 minutes to respond 😂 I don't constantly check my talk page sorry BittersweetParadox (talk) 23:35, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You already said you saw the message and ignored it. Too late to start lying now. Floquenbeam (talk) 23:36, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I literally didn't say that but okay buddy. Hope you're having a good time on your power trip. This is obviously more important to you than it is to me. It's an extremely trivial thing to block someone for. Admin like you driving away well-intentioned editors is what has made Wikipedia go so far downhill. It's extremely sad. Go ahead and make my block as long as you need it to be to fulfill your need for control over others. I'll pray for you little guy BittersweetParadox (talk) 23:43, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't reply to the user that commented on my talk page because I was not doing anything wrong, so I wasn't going to give them the time of day. - you, literally saying that. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:47, 6 February 2025 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

So I was blocked for making redirects of pages' sort names, then categorizing them as redirects from sort names. Somebody tell me where I went wrong because there is literally a redirect category called redirects from sort names. The redirects I made are completely justified in the title of the redirect category, and nowhere on the redirect category's page does it say that certain pages' sort names should not be made into redirects. The redirects I made are of each Super Bowl's sort name, which I think is fairly important seeing as those pages are visited often. But instead, I got blocked 😂 make it make sense oh all-powerful admins BittersweetParadox (talk) 23:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

(fixing script issue). No. Nothing about the above indicates you will be a productive editor if unblocked. This is your last chance to provide a genuine unblock request before you also lose access to your Talk. Star Mississippi 23:45, 6 February 2025 (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.

(edit conflict) As you were told before, you were not blocked for making redirects. You were originally blocked for ignoring (as you said in your first unblock request, willfully and deliberately ignoring) a request to stop and discuss the redirects. Your block was then changed to indefinite because your first unblock request was, to call a spade a spade, a dumpster fire. I strongly suggest you understand this and read the guide to appealing blocks before requesting unblock again. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:46, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Super Bowl 001 etc. are not sort names. Did you even read the Rcat description? voorts (talk/contributions) 23:51, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Right – Template:R from sort name is primarily used for sorting the names of people, for their biography articles. For example, Category:Redirects from sort names, S. This is to aid searches for people by their last names. There's no need for such redirects for Super Bowls. This is a related, but different concept from {{DEFAULTSORT:Super Bowl 009}} which is used for sorting the order that names are shown on Category pages, not for user searches. – wbm1058 (talk) 23:59, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• As others have stated, this block isn't about redirects or "hurt feelings", it's about communication. None of us work in isolation. If your edits are contested by another editor (whether or not they are an admin), you are obliged to stop and address their concerns. Otherwise, you can be brought to a noticeboard which is what happened. This is a collaborative editing platform which means working nicely with others regardless of who is right about policy. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:18, 7 February 2025 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I'm not sure how I'm supposed to show my ability to collaborate with other users when I can't even edit. Can an admin besides the guy who blocked me look at this please. I tried contacting one but I cannot.

Decline reason:

{{subst:Declining in favor of the more fully formed request below. You may have only one open at a time. I will not action the actual request}} Star Mississippi 01:34, 8 February 2025 (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.

BittersweetParadox (talk) 23:57, 7 February 2025 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I apologize for my recent actions. I was not aware that I had to reply to all comments on my talk page; mistakenly, I believed that if my edits were justified, which I felt was true, I could leave the comment be. Why I thought this I am not sure. It just seemed logical to me, but the logic I used throughout this situation was obviously very flawed. I was caught very off guard by being blocked, and I enjoy editing Wikipedia, so it made me angry. Also, I do believe I was editing in good faith. I know the admin who blocked me ("Floquenbeam") did not mean for their comments to come off the way I received them. I felt that some of their original comments were condescending and that they were actively trying to provoke me, specifically when they called me a liar. However, they were not in the wrong here; I was. I acknowledge that I overreacted and said things I shouldn't have, and I apologize to Floquenbeam and any others I made snide remarks to. I've taken a look at Floquenbeam's talk page and I see that they are an experienced editor of over 15 years. I should've done what Floquenbeam said to since they understand Wikipedia better than I do. I also do not place blame on anyone but myself for this situation, and I am not trying to make excuses; rather, I am trying to explain my (flawed) thought process. The way I've acted over the last 24 hours has not been for the good of the project, and I do apologize. I don't want to get too personal here, but my temper is something I've long struggled with. I recently started going back to therapy to attempt to address it and to give myself tools to use when I feel my temper flaring up. Once again, I apologize for my actions. I understand the reason I was blocked, and I understand that the things I said to Floquenbeam and other admins is unacceptable behavior. I also understand that editing Wikipedia is a privilege that can be taken away. When reading and replying to talk page comments in the future, I will assume good faith. I also understand that I need to review some of Wikipedia's editing guidelines and the Manual of Style. If anyone has any suggestions for any specific sections I should check out, that would be great. Thank you to the admins who have been in this situation for making Wikipedia a better place. God bless. BittersweetParadox (talk) 00:36, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Block evasion. Bbb23 (talk) 16:35, 12 February 2025 (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.

Thank you. I'm obviously not an administrator, but I'd endorse/support/recommend/whatever this unblock to at least give another chance. If problems flare up again, then BittersweetParadox can be blocked again permenantly. Cremastra (talk) 00:50, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you it's appreciated BittersweetParadox (talk) 01:03, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What will you be doing differently from the last time this happened 6 months ago? This is not the first time you've thought you were blocked. In terms of your question about where to start, I recommend looking over the warnings on your talk page, and familiarizing yourself with the policies and concerns that were raised about your previous behavior. ^SMason_Garrison 04:31, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@BittersweetParadox: This is the second time in under a year that you've let your temper get the better of you and had other editors talk to you about it. I'm not going to decline your unblock request, but I recommend that you withdraw it and take some time away from Wikipedia to work on controlling your temper and identifying what it is that triggers you about editing. voorts (talk/contributions) 05:12, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I count 72 occurrences of the string "listed at Redirects for discussion" on this page, so am considering a WP:Conditional unblock with a WP:ban on creating redirects. Can you think of things you would like to do on Wikipedia, other than create redirects? wbm1058 (talk) 12:31, 8 February 2025 (UTC) I also count Category: 29 times so considering a ban from Category: namespace and adding or removing categories from a page. – wbm1058 (talk) 12:36, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Rojo (Cuban baseball team) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 13 § Rojo (Cuban baseball team) until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 18:37, 13 February 2025 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Hello. I am requesting my block be reviewed by a new administrator. It has been a few weeks and I have had time to reflect. I understand my actions were wrong. If there is anything else I can do to speed up this process in any way, I would be grateful if someone would share that.

I truly do apologize for my previous "inability to collaborate with other editors" (I only use quotes because that is the reasoning given for my block; which, by the way, is completely valid). I would appreciate a second chance if possible as I feel that Wikipedia is an important tool in fighting the spread of misinformation. Thank you.

Decline reason:

I have double checked and the Royals10 account certainly appears to be block evasion from you. I am declining this unblock request. PhilKnight (talk) 16:20, 5 March 2025 (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.

BittersweetParadox (talk) 21:13, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

{{CU needed}} to check for block evasion since the last unblock decline. -- asilvering (talk) 05:41, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The account Royals10 looks likely to me. PhilKnight (talk) 16:55, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, BittersweetParadox. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! DreamRimmer bot II (talk) 05:24, 5 March 2025 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Hello. I am requesting my block be reviewed by a new administrator. It has been a few weeks and I have had time to reflect. I understand my actions were wrong. If there is anything else I can do to speed up this process in any way, I would be grateful if someone would share that. I truly do apologize for my previous "inability to collaborate with other editors" (I only use quotes because that is the reasoning given for my block; which, by the way, is completely valid). I would appreciate a second chance if possible as I feel that Wikipedia is an important tool in fighting the spread of misinformation. Thank you

Decline reason:

Given that you abusively used multiple accounts (see WP:SOCK), I recommend taking the standard offer: do not edit the English Wikipedia at all (under account, IP, etc.) for at least six months. Return no earlier than September 24, 2025 and request another unblock addressing your original block. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:18, 25 March 2025 (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.

BittersweetParadox (talk) 22:09, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:NBA championship–winning players has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:Namiba 19:08, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]