User talk:Funtiberry

Hello, I'm Ohnoitsjamie. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contribution attempts have been disallowed by an edit filter as they did not appear constructive. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. If you believe the edit filter disallowance was a false positive, please report it here. Feel free to ask for assistance at the Teahouse whenever you like. Thank you. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:38, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank You. Funtiberry (talk) 08:26, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Ikechi Uko have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• If you need help, please see the Introduction to Wikipedia, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Ikechi Uko was changed by Funtiberry (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.899117 on 2025-03-10T08:48:27+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 08:48, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Nse Essien, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you would like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Adakiko (talk) 09:45, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• You removed nine citations. You need to give a valid reason for doing so. Adakiko (talk) 09:46, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Tacyarg. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Asijiki Coalition for the Decriminalisation of Sex Work have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. Take a look at our guidelines about external links. 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. Tacyarg (talk) 10:50, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

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. Melcous (talk) 02:52, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fred Emery, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Self-managing. 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, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. ✶Quxyz✶ 10:58, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain namespaces ((Article)) for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think 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 ~~~~}}.  Star Mississippi 13:28, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

You have been warned on multiple occasions and have not engaged with your fellow editors' concerns. As such you have lost access to edit articles until you do Star Mississippi 13:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi Star Mississippi, I appreciate you pointing out my mistakes I’m new to Wikipedia… I’d appreciate feedback on how to contribute appropriately also I would engage more constructively when editors raised concerns. Thank you Funtiberry (talk) 11:16, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I would like to appeal my indefinite block. I acknowledge that I did not adequately address concerns raised by other editors in the past. I have reviewed Wikipedia’s policies on consensus,and what Wikipedia is not, and I am committed to working collaboratively with the community. I apologize for my previous conduct and request an opportunity to demonstrate improved editing behavior. Thank you for considering my appeal. —Funtiberry (talk) 11:13, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Excellent. You have an opportunity to demonstrate that, not just claim that. Make edit requests on article talk pages. Once you have a significant number of these edit requests accepted, then but only then should you contest your block. Yamla (talk) 12:31, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I would like to re-appeal my indefinite block. and also how do I know if an edit request has been accepted Funtiberry (talk) 19:49, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

@Star Mississippi:,

I am writing to appeal my block, as I understand I was blocked for not engaging with fellow editors’ concerns despite multiple warnings. I sincerely apologize for my lack of communication and for any disruption this caused. I’ve reviewed Wikipedia’s policies on collaboration, dispute resolution, and the blocking policy, and I recognize where I fell short in responding to other editors. Recently, I made various edit requests that were reviewed by other editors, which I believe shows my effort to work constructively within Wikipedia’s processes. Moving forward, I commit to actively participating in talk page discussions, responding promptly to editors’ concerns, and ensuring my contributions align with community standards. I am eager to contribute positively and respectfully to Wikipedia.

Thank you for your time and consideration. Funtiberry (talk) 15:45, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Funtiberry. I see you have taken @Yamla's advice in making talk page requests, thank you. Please file an unblock request and another admin will review it. (Note to any reviewing admin, I have not had the chance to look into their TP requests but am fine with an unblock if you see merit) Star Mississippi 02:20, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you... i would do just that. Funtiberry (talk) 22:16, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to High-level programming language, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Malformed ref, conclusions that are not in the ref, pointless generalization... all reads like AI generated text Meters (talk) 03:18, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Please explain your recent edits. You have been making rapid-fire edits across multiple articles that appear likely to have used large language model artificial intelligence. See WP:LLM. Are you using LLMs? Meters (talk) 03:44, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

You were previously blocked for this at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1186#User:Funtiberry using LLMs to add content to pages and possibly for edit summaries. It's really bad idea to get unblocked and then return to the same behaviour. Meters (talk) 03:51, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

I only use grammarly to correct punctuation marks; I don't use it for edits. it is connected to my chrome Funtiberry (talk) 03:55, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

I find that very hard to believe. You are very rapidly creating. content that bears all the hallmarks of AI-generated text. Please explain why your supposed references do not support your claims, or are malformed, or are even flagged a phishing sites. Meters (talk) 03:58, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Let me give you a rundown how i make my edits.

For instance now i just opened a new article ThinkVision is the name of the article.

I search it up on google:

ThinkVision is Lenovo's professional line of computer monitors, known for high-resolution, color-accurate displays, ergonomic designs, and features like USB-C connectivity, power delivery, and AI-powered energy saving, catering to business, creative, and portable needs for enhanced productivity and reduced eye strain. They offer a wide range, from compact portable screens to large 4K and 3D monitors for demanding visual tasks, integrating seamlessly with Lenovo's Think family of devices.

This is what I get. Then I check the article, and I see there is nothing like the USB-C connectivity or AI-powered energy saving, so I add it. i attach the link to it Funtiberry (talk) 04:06, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

@Funtiberry that passage is from Google's section entitled AI Overview. It is not something you should be referencing or linking. If you truly do not understand that, you should not even make edit requests. Star Mississippi 04:11, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

I spot checked a few @Funtiberry and I see the same concerns and worse from what @Meters flagged and I have removed your access to edit articles again. You may still make edit requests, but please do not use gramamarly or any LLMs in doing so. Courtesy ping @331dot Star Mississippi 04:09, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Foreign relations of Uganda, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources to see how to add references to an article. Thank you. Meters (talk) 03:59, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain namespaces ((Article)) for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think 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 ~~~~}}.  Star Mississippi 04:06, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

@Star Mississippi@Meters https://nilebasin.org/about-us/history , Yes, Uganda has been central to Nile Basin diplomacy, initiating the 1999 Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) in Entebbe to foster cooperation for equitable water management among all riparian states, providing a neutral ground for dialogue despite political challenges, serving as a base for key Nile institutions since the 1960s, championing frameworks for shared benefits.

I have verifiable proof that everything I added is correct; I cross-checked with various sites. Just that some text was underlined in red, so when I highlight, Grammarly gives it to me in a better way than I typed and does the punctuation also. i never knew it was a LLM, Funtiberry (talk) 04:28, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

You are not helping your case. That's not the ref that you used in your edit. You used https://canberra.mofa.go.ug/service/ugandas-foreign-policy, which does not even mention the Nile Basin work. Meters (talk) 04:36, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

I just saw where and how I faulted and messed up. Please, does this go for other articles I edited? I meant, did i give the wrong refrence for what i added Funtiberry (talk) 04:51, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, every page with major edits I have looked at has had the same issues. It's very clear what you have been doing. I have yet to see a proper ref. Instead I've seen multiple refs that do not support your claims, refs that are completely malformed, even a ref that is flagged as a phishing site. That does not even touch on the various other problems that scream of LLM usage. The fact that you do not recognize the problems suggests that this is a WP:CIR issue.

If you ever hope to get unblocked you need to demonstrate that you understand what you have been doing wrong. Meters (talk) 04:53, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

i would revert back to using Request edits for now till i get it right, thank you for pointing out Funtiberry (talk) 04:57, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

I still don't think you understand this. Do not use edit requests to request that similarly AI-generated content be added to articles. If you waste editors' time with the type of material you have been adding you will likely be completely blocked. For example, I just undid this one . How in the world could you think that a 2023 reference could be used to support claims about 2024 financial results, not to mention the fact that none of the future predictions are actually in the source. Meters (talk) 05:09, 5 January 2026 (UTC)