User talk:Blackbombchu

The article Java update virus has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is no one thing called the "Java update virus". The "fake Java update" window is a fairly common trojan delivery system, not a specific piece of software, and certainly doesn't warrant an article of its own. There are (literally) millions of viruses, malware and trojans, and aside from those which have a genuinely significant economic or cultural impact Wikipedia shouldn't be trying to document them.

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.  Mogism (talk) 22:40, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Java update virus 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/Java update virus 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.  Mogism (talk) 23:56, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Toronto blackout (2013)

The article Toronto blackout (2013) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:NOTNEWS

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. ...William 22:45, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Toronto blackout (2013) 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/Toronto blackout (2013) 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. ...William 04:39, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Toronto blackout (2013), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blackout (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:50, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Google Feedback, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blogger (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:57, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

The article Google Feedback has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Every major corporation (and most non-major ones) have customer feedback forms on their website and at their stores. Google's feedback form is competely generic and is no more notable than the stack of "we value your comments" cards at the end of a Burger King counter.

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.  Mogism (talk) 20:55, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Google Feedback 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/Google Feedback 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.  Mogism (talk) 21:15, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi. I'm Jojalozzo. I noticed you have linked some uncommon but non-technical terms (e.g. "thrice" and "albeit") to their wiktionary definitions. I recommend replacing such usages with more common terms instead of adding dictionary links. Please use links mainly for Wikipedia articles. Thanks. Jojalozzo 04:52, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello Blackbombchu,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Marine D3 for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia 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. --Animalparty-- (talk) 07:06, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia from Wikiproject Medicine (also known as WPMED).

We're a group of editors who strive to improve the quality of medical articles here on Wikipedia. One of our members has noticed that you are interested in editing medical articles; it's great to have a new interested editor on board. In your wiki-voyages, a few things that may be relevant to editing wikipedia articles are:

• Thanks for coming aboard! We always appreciate a new editor. Feel free to leave us a message at any time on the talk page of WPMED. If you are interested in joining the project yourself, there is a participant list where you can sign up. Please leave a message on the WPMED talk page if you have any problems, suggestions, would like review of an article, need suggestions for articles to edit, or would like some collaboration when editing!

• Sourcing of medical and health-related content on Wikipedia is guided by our medical sourcing guidelines, commonly referred to as MEDRS. MEDRS typically requires recent secondary sources to support information; its application is further explained here. Primary sources (case studies, case reports, research studies) are rarely used, especially if the primary sources are produced by the organisation or individual who is promoting a claim.

• Wikipedia is a kingdom full of a wide variety of editors with different interests, skills, and knowledge. We all manage to get along through a lot of discussion that happens under the scenes and through the bold, edit, discuss editing cycle. If you encounter any problems, you can discuss it on an article's talk page or post a message on the WPMED talk page.

Feel free to drop a note on my talk page if you have any problems. I wish you all the best on your wiki voyages! --LT910001 (talk) 05:06, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

I think it was just articles on teeth I was ediding, not medical articles in general. Blackbombchu (talk) 00:19, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Blackbombchu and welcome to Wikipedia! It appears you are participating in a class project. If you haven't done so already, we encourage you to go through our training for students.

Go through our online training for students.

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Please also read this helpful advice for students.

Before you create an article, make sure you understand what kind of articles are accepted here. Remember: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and while many topics are encyclopedic, some things are not.

Your instructor or professor may wish to set up a course page, if your class doesn't already have one. It is highly recommended that you place this text: {{Educational assignment}} on the talk page of any articles you are working on as part of your Wikipedia-related course assignment. This will let other editors know this article is a subject of an educational assignment and aid your communication with them.

We hope you like it here and encourage you to stay even after your assignment is finished! Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:01, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited TORI, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Correspondence and Pluralism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:48, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on SIR Corp, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
• It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. BethNaught (talk) 19:43, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

The article TORI has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Notability; Empty article

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. GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 01:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

The article Registry Dr. has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsouced and unsourceable - the three "sources" are all from highly dubious websites, and as far as I can see no reliable source of any kind has ever even mentioned this product in passing. Also appears to be at best an ultra-close paraphrase and at worst an outright copyvio from this site. Wikipedia is not a directory of obscure software.

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.  Mogism (talk) 19:56, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Registry Dr. 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/Registry Dr. 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.  Mogism (talk) 23:36, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

I respect your reversion. Have you carried out a good faith effort to find reliable sources regarding their alcoholic beverage policy? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:18, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Blackbombchu, thank you for your notification. However, per Manual of Style's WP:FILMPLOT, films are themselves primary sources, so the plot section doesn't necessarily need citing a source. It's common practice here that plot sections in film articles don't have source. And regarding your removal, if you watch the film, the snowman Olaf has said a very poignant thing that "An act of true love will thaw a frozen heart" which apparently refers to Anna's saving her sister. This is not original research. I've been watching this article since its creation, and the line has existed there since last December or so, without anyone's objection. For now, I reverted your edit; if you are still unsatisfied, please open a thread on its talk page. —ALittleQuenhi (talk to me) 08:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi! Have there been updates on it? WhisperToMe (talk) 20:28, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

The article Masters of Survival has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Sourced only to press releases or unreliable sources. Doesn't seem to be notable on its own

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. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 21:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Hey there, I saw your second post at the village pump, so I'll take it as face value and try to explain. It's clear you have very particular, very strong emotions, but at the same time the way you are presently expressing them is not unpackable by others who aren't familiar with you. I mean this in a very straightforward sense, as someone who has similar problems sometimes: after the first half-sentence of your initial post, no one has a shot of understanding what you were trying to say; you were not speaking a public language. It's not my place, but I want to recommend in the strongest terms anyway that you should look elsewhere than Wikipedia—probably elsewhere than the internet—to find someone who is better able to connect with you and your feelings right now. I get what it's like, I mean that—and yes, the Internet is too lonely a place for people like you and I much of the time. Hopefully my attempt to speak from the heart gets across here. Remsense ‥ 论 15:30, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

I read it. I see the point. Through God, we can do an amazing job of getting things done eventually. Blackbombchu (talk) 18:41, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

I concur 100% with the OP, but your reply may indicate a need for a little less tact. You said at Village Pump: I guess it's just my tiny little seed. It will add that very little tiny bit. They will all add up and get us there eventually. If you still believe that, you don't "see the point". Planting a seed would require the successful transfer of some ideas from your mind to others, and that didn't happen. You are on a different plane, not better or worse but just different. Until we can transfer ideas without using language, we can't communicate meaningfully with you. I don't know how much of this will be understood. ―Mandruss ☎ 05:25, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

Those who know how to organzie it have something to look forward to 1000 years in advance and never give up and want to do their small part that looks at what's been getting attacked and guards it and not how we got there. When they're looking to see what's been getting attacked to guard, they will be like Ms. Hardbroom was 5:05 into the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUkVcd7SbTw. Not one of the rest of us hasn't done all those complicated and advanced plans I can't follow giving me no part to play and starting to accumulate power. Also, I didn't write the post that appears earlier in this section that says it was by me. Blackbombchu (talk) 17:28, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Oh yeah. I see that this was a very old post now. Blackbombchu (talk) 17:30, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contribution(s). However, as a general rule, while user talk pages permit a small degree of generalisation, other talk pages such as Wikipedia talk:Why is Wikipedia losing contributors - Thinking about remedies are strictly for discussing improvements to their associated main pages, and many of them have special instructions on the top. They are not a search engine, a chatbot, or a general discussion forum about the article's topic or any other topic. If you have questions or ideas and are not sure where to post them, consider asking at the Teahouse. Thanks. DVdm (talk) 17:28, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Those who know how to organize it have something to look forward to 1000 years in advance and never give up and want to do their small part of forming a very secure system that looks at what's been getting attacked and guards it and not how we got there. When they're looking to see what's been getting attacked, they will be like Ms. Hardbroom was 5:05 into the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUkVcd7SbTw. Not one of the rest of us hasn't done all the complicated and advanced plans I can't follow giving me no part to play and starting to accumulate power. Blackbombchu (talk) 17:52, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

You have already been blocked for this on Commons. It might be best to stop it. Nakonana (talk) 20:41, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

@Blackbombchu, this website is here to create and build encyclopedia articles. It isn't here to talk about philosophy or religion, so the users and editors of this website aren't here to do that either.

I realise you think it's important to put your ideas and views across, unfortunately you're doing it in completely the wrong place.

You need an audience of like-minded people to talk to.

I'm sure there will be others on Reddit or philosophy/religious websites who will be very happy to hear about your ideas and talk further with you, but you just can't do that at Wikipedia - that's not what we or this website are here for.

You can either stop posting here and look for a website where people want to engage with your ideas, or this account will have to be blocked.

Wikipedia administrators don't want to have to block your account, but it will have to be done if you keep trying to use this website for something it's not designed to do in the first place.

Your audience isn't here, please try to look for them elsewhere on the internet. Blue Sonnet (talk) 22:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Humanity needs to plan for tomorrow bottom up, not top down. Top down has never worked. The whole entire system is crumbling. It's so easy to run into holes of doing things with so much power. We need a very secure system that leaves no one any holes of doing things with so much power to look out for. Those who know how to organize it have something to look forward to 1000 years in advance and never give up and want to do their small part of forming a very secure system that looks at what's been getting attacked and guards it and not how we got there. When they're looking to see what's been getting attacked, they will be like Ms. Hardbroom was 5:05 into the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUkVcd7SbTw. I'm lost and confused. I don't know what's happening, what's going on. There seems to be a discussion my my section of the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse titled "Left behind, forgotten, invisible." Maybe it's complaining about me. God can do far more than we can possibly ask for or imagine. Some people can conceive of parts of God that other people can't possibly conceive of. Nobody should have so much power. You shouldn't have so much power. Blackbombchu (talk) 23:47, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

The discussion was about how your posts are inappropriate for Wikipedia and how to ask you to please stop posting here. It's been closed because that's not what this website is for. Blue Sonnet (talk) 00:11, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Blackbombchu is WP:NOTHERE. Blue Sonnet (talk) 00:52, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

I think I've finally sort of learned it. See my reply on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hoary. Blackbombchu (talk) 01:29, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for replying - can you please let us know what you've learned, so we can make sure you understand everything properly now? Blue Sonnet (talk) 02:03, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

It's so hard to figure out how to describe it. Blackbombchu (talk) 16:13, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

You just need to agree to only use Wikipedia for editing encyclopedia articles or talking about how to improve encyclopedia articles - for example, "I think source X is more reliable than source Y because Z", or "this article isn't written very neutrally, I think we should rewrite this part because...".

You can read Wikipedia:TALKNOTFORUM for the official guideline, if it helps. Blue Sonnet (talk) 16:20, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}.  — rsjaffe 🗣️ 16:33, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Humanity needs to plan for tomorrow bottom up, not top down. Top down has never worked. Those who know how to organize it have something to look forward to 1000 years in advance and never give up and will do their small part of forming a very secure system that looks at what's been getting attacked and guards it and now how we got there. When they're looking to see what's been getting attacked, they will be like Ms. Hardbroom was 5:05 into the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUkVcd7SbTw. Blackbombchu (talk) 18:34, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked because an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

---

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the Unblock Ticket Request System that have been declined, leading to the posting of this notice.

CoconutOctopus talk 18:38, 17 April 2026 (UTC)