User talk:Heymisterscott

Hello Heymisterscott! Your additions to South Wilmington, Illinois 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, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Signed,The4lines |||| ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 03:07, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Nose 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.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Nose was changed by Heymisterscott (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.956832 on 2022-02-03T02:34:26+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 02:34, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Nudity in religion. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. --WikiLinuz {talk} 04:04, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Please do not revert to edits which state the opposite view of the cited material. Please bother to read cited material. You know what it is called when someone states a view outside of a cited source? A POINT OF VIEW. You clearly did not have the slightest sense of what the cited material had said when you decided to smash that revert button back to stating an opinion based statement which was not shared by the cited article. So how about instead of attacking people for trying to ensure material reflects the cited articles, you either buzz off or actually read the articles cited. Reverting back to someone’s personal opinion which is the opposite view of the cited article is not appropriate. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. “Thank you” Heymisterscott (talk) 04:05, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Wracking. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Please use helpful edit summaries that do not make personal remarks about other editors Wracking ^talk! 04:01, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

What is this referring to? Heymisterscott (talk) 06:46, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

This is referring to your edit summaries, such as Just….no. This article looks like it was written by a blindfolded ape and Fixed absolutely horrendous grammar. Whoever wrote this should never ever edit again. . See WP:SUMMARYNO. Thanks, Wracking ^talk! 19:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

I would apologize, but I'm really not sorry.

Thanks Heymisterscott (talk) 19:31, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Seriously stop bugging me Heymisterscott (talk) 04:09, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Criticize. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to User:Alextheconservative—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Criticize (talk) 13:27, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi, sorry, I should have properly cited this edit, my bad Heymisterscott (talk) 01:10, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Your recent edit to Grey Highlands Secondary School appears to have added a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. Meters (talk) 22:15, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation, that’s all I wanted. To me I had thought an actor in a few major tv shows would be notable but makes sense if they don’t have their own page

hey criticize don’t delete comment which have nothing to do with you. Heymisterscott (talk) 12:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Grey Highlands Secondary School. 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. Again, please stop leaving uncivil edit summaries. Meters (talk) 22:16, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

And the same for your "Bite me" posts on talk pages. Meters (talk) 22:23, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Constructive contributions are appreciated and strongly encouraged, but your recent edit to the userpage of another user may be considered vandalism. Specifically, your edit to User:Criticize may be offensive or unwelcome. In general, it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing others' user pages without their permission. Instead, please bring the matter to their talk page and let them edit their user page themselves if they agree on a need to do so. Please refer to Wikipedia:User page for more information on user page etiquette. Thank you. Nil🥝 00:28, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, I was unaware of this. I will bring this up in this user’s talk page. Heymisterscott (talk) 01:31, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. – Frood (talk) 01:51, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Ok thanks for the info. Keep me in the loop Heymisterscott (talk) 01:55, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 ~~~~}}.  ~Lofty abyss 01:53, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

(If you need to participate in the ANI thread at some point that could happen, though...) ~Lofty abyss 02:13, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Ok much appreciated. I can see why I was blocked for editing, thanks for communicating why. Totally understandable! Heymisterscott (talk) 02:28, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing.

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

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Grey Highlands Secondary School, you may be blocked from editing. No waiting a month and restoring your unsourced and apparently non-notable alumnus is not going to work. This has already been explained to you , and you said you understood . Coming back from your block and edit warring over this is not going to end well. Meters (talk) 03:42, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Grey Highlands Secondary School. Bump to final after seeing this from a few days ago. So, not just some of the same edits, but some of the same offensive behaviour too. Meters (talk) 03:45, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Bro is like a reddit moderator raging on wikipedia. It’s not that complex. The actor is on Degrassi and Arthur, two very popular shows, which him notoriety. Heymisterscott (talk) 02:13, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

As I said, you're back from your block and right back to the same behaviour. Trying to sneak your unsourced apparently non-notable alumnus back in, leaving rude edit summaries such as "Fucks sake", and commenting "shut the fuck up" in a four-year-old talk page post I made. Are you trying to get blocked again? Meters (talk) 07:43, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

uwu what’s this? Heymisterscott (talk) 02:35, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, as an uninvolved editor who happened upon this thread randomly, Heymisterscott needs to start being civil immediately, or it is very likely that he will be blocked. Read our civility policy and make sure all of your comments adhere to it, or you will not be permitted to edit Wikipedia for long. Thanks, QuicoleJR (talk) 19:49, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi, I don't understand your involvement in this discussion. Could you please let me know how you happened upon this thread? Thanks Heymisterscott (talk) 05:59, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Answer Heymisterscott (talk) 00:13, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

If you really need to know, it was from Special:RecentChanges. That said, you seriously need to work on being more civil. Any more comments like what you made above, and you will likely be blocked again. QuicoleJR (talk) 00:59, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks so much. I’m still not clear why you would involve yourself in this discussion Heymisterscott (talk) 04:38, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

I must say, that question is silly and irrelevant and does not address your behavior, aside from leaving the impression that you think Wikipedia civility rules don't apply to you. If you must know, I'm "involving myself" not at all. The edit filter that detects possible mangled unblock requests shows a possible mangled unlock request on your talk page. From time to time, I monitor that edit filter. Have a nice day. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:32, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

That question wasn’t directed to you - unless this is an alt account? Heymisterscott (talk) 16:16, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

And now you're making aspersions of sockpuppetry. I am not Deepfriedokra, although I find the comparison flattering. This is your final warning. Continue making personal attacks, and you will likely find yourself permanently removed from the site. You need to be civil with other editors. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:25, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Please review Wikipedia:Assume good faith. I was not making “aspersions of sockpuppetry.” The user Deepfriedokra had made a comment which seemed to be written as if it was a response to my previous comment. I was asking for clarification if the accounts were connected, as it was worded as if continuing the prior thread.

Assuming good faith will be better for your mental health, rather than assuming an honest question is an attack on character. Heymisterscott (talk) 18:35, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Apologize Heymisterscott (talk) 01:22, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Why are you reviving this old thread? I don't see anywhere where I need to apologize, so please don't ping me again. QuicoleJR (talk) 01:28, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Ok Heymisterscott (talk) 05:27, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month for making personal attacks towards other editors. 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 ~~~~}}.  Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:09, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

• Civility is not optional on this project, and repeated personal attacks are not tolerated. -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:09, 5 December 2025 (UTC)