User talk:Fun81

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joe Moravsky, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Moravsky until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

An article you recently created, The Floor (Australian Game Show), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Dan arndt (talk) 05:35, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CF-501 Falcon was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

More citations are needed, mostly from independent sources. If you could find articles that talk about the show that would be great.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:The Floor (Australian Game Show) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:21, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

thanks a lot sucker.... because nothing is ever reliable enough hereeeeee Fun81 (talk) 00:14, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

@Fun81, While I don't appreciate being called a "sucker", I understand your frustration. However verifiability is one of the core principals of Wikipedia.

The biggest problem I see is the Format and Duels sections are completely lacking references. Additionally, for the Duels section see WP:NOTSTAT, while the winners can be included over detail with no sources is bad. Best, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:04, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Fun81! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 01:21, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Look at the American page and tell me how it's any different. Fun81 (talk) 21:02, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

There are 56 references, with multiple references in the season tables compared to 9. If you feel like my decline is unreasonable, you can resubmit it. I won't review it again. Also please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Best, CF-501 Falcon (talk · contribs) 00:22, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Over half of those come from ratings. Fun81 (talk) 23:57, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Fun81. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:The Floor (Australian Game Show), a page you created, has not been edited in at least five 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) 22:07, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Floor (American game show), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Country music awards. 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) 07:54, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Fun81. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "The Floor".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:23, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to The Floor (British game show). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted it to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit the draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. 🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 15:40, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

• middle fingers *

Fun81 (talk) 17:38, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

thank you for what you do for this cool show especially creating another page after the draft was rejected YoDragster007 (talk) 12:19, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

thanks, i guess. This is the only place wikipedia isn't a jerk. Fun81 (talk) 17:58, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

lol not sure what you mean by that but you didn't have to do it either YoDragster007 (talk) 22:29, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Serge, an Admin here on Wikipedia. I'm...a bit concerned about some of your interactions with other editors. Please make sure you are aware of Wikipedia's stance on no personal attacks and staying civil when interacting with others. Your own talk page alone is reason for concern. Here, it looks like you did the text version of giving someone the middle finger? And have left it up for almost 2 months? And here you called someone a "sucker" for some reason.

These are not appropriate reactions to other editors. Please stop this. Any more instances of this sort of conduct may result in a temporary block of your account. Thank you. Sergecross73 msg me 15:46, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Just because a person disagrees with you does not mean they are acting in bad faith. Sometimes a newcomer may simply not know the difference, but having a long-time editor who mislabels an edit as vandalism says more about the accuser than the accused.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Most_people_who_disagree_with_you_on_content_are_not_vandal

I don't like being a jerk. I don't want to be and I usually keep to myself. But if Wikipedia wants to improve it needs to start teaching people how to edit and stop teaching people how to act. Great coders are built because they code well.

-----

When a majority of editors decline to use the talk page, whose fault is it if an editor makes drastic pages to a page because WP:randomrule says so without prior discussion and quoting the policy via use of the talk page? Nor is the talk page seen as a way of adding rules that "Do not edit this, this is how the page should look, etc". I do not hate Wikipedia, but there are some dumb decisions and the fact you guys even let random editors write essays of their own opinions to dictate how the community should feel just makes Wikipedia more of a forum message board bound for flame and edit wars because you've dictated what a "good person" is. Most fandom.com sites or wiki sites have this down because its the same exact thing on every page. Infobox here, template there, and everyone assumes that's how most pages look. Because wikipedia has a much larger scope, just assuming editors read every single article and then magically know how to edit, instead of giving practical examples in talk pages of how to edit is not going to get newbies anywhere when the "I've been here for 20 years" person shows up.

People do not treat Wikipedia the way code is treated. Comments are not left and everything is just assumed to be working perfectly. On fandom is it less of an issue because the scope is much narrower but on Wikipedia instead of comments you just get templates new users won't know how to use until they're better at editing, and then will have to go the talk page and leave a comment and hope anybody sees it. If Wikipedia started treating its site with the basis of making better pages instead of trying to find the problems that exist in society, maybe Wikipedia would get somewhere. The reason edit wars happen is because edits go straight to the top of the admin chain. They just get published and the big bad wolf is expected to revert it if its bad. People cite WP more than they cite MOS, which is telling.

The only way to learn to edit is by editing. If practical examples of good and bad edits aren't given on a page, a new editor will obviously mess something up. Yes, and having rules and then having a WP:"Ingore all rules" as a verified policy without any substance is obviously dumb. What's even more dumb is then saying "ingore all rules, use common sense" when you have put out over 500 WP essay rules. What's the point??

Suppose you have an idea…

What was the point of the rules?

Is that because the rules are wrong?

No: Ignore the rules and DO IT

Yes: Change the rules and DO IT

There are too many WP's that new users give up. That is why wikipedia is broken. They don't each users how to edit. It's all about civic nonsense that's basic in society. Teaching users how to edit is more important so that they don't make dumb edits.

That is why writing what the template says in your own words, with reference to the particular situation, is more likely to communicate well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Don%27t_template_the_regulars

All these dang WP philopshy policies on civility are weird AF, like anyone can know every single rule in online discussion. Fun81 (talk) 02:06, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

None of that has anything to do with my warning, which was to stop being rude and insulting others. Yes, Wikipedia takes some time and effort to understand, and it can be frustrating, but it doesn't excuse the personal attacks on others. Sergecross73 msg me 02:19, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

Ok, I can stop being rude, but that doesn't change the fact Wikipedia has a lot of problems that MediaWiki/fandom doesn't have mostly due to the fact Mediawiki focuses on editing more than they focus on solving talk page battles that were never going to be resolved in the first place. The talk page battles lead to more edit-warring than usual.

I'll stop being rude. Did you want an apology? Fun81 (talk) 06:11, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

If the only possible way to overcome page campers is a long and confusing process that takes weeks or months, that's not gonna work. Fun81 (talk) 06:18, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

All I needed was confirmation that you'd stop. Thank you for that. If you need help with Wikipedia, the WP:TEAHOUSE or relevant WP:WIKIPROJECTs are probably the place to go. Once you feel like you're ready to propose constructive change, the various sections of WP:VILLAGEPUMP are a good avenue to discuss things like that. Sergecross73 msg me 16:32, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

Fun81 (talk) 04:04, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Fun81 (talk) 04:04, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Just to confirm before I move on - did you mean to say anything else in those 2 blank comments you just signed in response to my comment? Sergecross73 msg me 18:10, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

I was using emoji with text like smiley face :) but it doesn't work Fun81 (talk) 15:43, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

I added a bit for Season 2 of this show before it begins on April 19. ~2026-21714-07 (talk) 22:52, 16 April 2026 (UTC)