User talk:Jareddeluxe17

You have already been active under the IPs Special:Contributions/163.123.227.253 and Special:Contributions/2600:6C40:5C00:839:0:0:0:0/64 from just west of St Louis, MO. Your additions to various Who articles have been reverted many times. Please read WP:MULTIPLE which means that all of your contributions will be considered together, including the ones under IP addresses and the ones from your new username. Binksternet (talk) 21:06, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war, according to the reverts you've made to 20th Century Masters – The Millennium Collection: The Best of the Who. This means that you are repeatedly reverting content back to how you think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree. Once it is known that there is a disagreement, users are expected to collaborate with others, avoid editing disruptively, and try to reach a consensus – rather than repeatedly reverting the changes made by other users.

Important points to note:

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

You need to discuss the disagreement on the article's talk page and work towards a revision that represents consensus among everyone involved. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution if discussions reach an impasse. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to engage in edit warring, you may be blocked from editing. Previously active under the IPs Special:Contributions/163.123.227.253 and Special:Contributions/2600:6C40:5C00:839:0:0:0:0/64. Binksternet (talk) 01:23, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

What is going on?

Why do you keep removing the vinyl track listing from this wikipedia page? That track listing is unique to the other variations. Also, why do you keep removing the extra stuff on "Icon"? All of that was on previously (which I did not add, by the way, it was there) was only combined, so as not to look like two separate albums in one page. For me, these removals are the start of this "edit war". Can you at least give me a REASONABLE and LEGITIMATE reason why this is so? Jareddeluxe17 (talk) 15:19, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

• MOS:THEMUSIC says we use lower case "the" for band names in running prose.
• WP:ALTTRACKLIST says other release tracklistings "should only be included when those tracks have had significant coverage in secondary sources and are the subject of extensive commentary in the article — such as information about their recording, musical content or critical response and commercial performance." You can't just include a vinyl tracklist because it exists, or because it is slightly different than other releases.
• WP:USERG says that user reviews are not reliable, for instance AllMusic user reviews, Sputnikmusic user reviews, Amazon user reviews, etc. Further guidance is given at WP:ALBUMAVOID which says that Sputnikmusic is only reliable if the reviewer is Staff or Emeritus. Not User.

Thanks for your time. Binksternet (talk) 01:57, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

What is going on?

Why do you keep removing the vinyl track listing from this wikipedia page? That track listing is unique to the other variations. Also, why do you keep removing the extra stuff on "Icon"? All of that was on previously (which I did not add, by the way, it was there) was only combined, so as not to look like two separate albums in one page. For me, these removals are the start of this "edit war". Can you at least give me a REASONABLE and LEGITIMATE reason why this is so? Jareddeluxe17 (talk) 15:21, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Your questions will be answered if you read the guideline at WP:ALTTRACKLIST which sets a high bar. Binksternet (talk) 15:36, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Also, why do you not consider Discogs to be a reliable source? I'm extremely curious why. Jareddeluxe17 (talk) 15:46, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

WP:USERG says that websites are unreliable if they allow users to log in and change the facts, which is true of discogs. The guideline at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Sources#Unreliable_sources specifically names discogs as unreliable.

You are still ignoring MOS:THEMUSIC and WP:EXPLICITGENRE and WP:ALTTRACKLIST. It's like you didn't bother to read the guideline and don't care about doing it the right way. Binksternet (talk) 15:52, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

It never said anything about Discogs becoming unreliable...at least from what I read anyway. Jareddeluxe17 (talk) 15:57, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

It's right there at WP:ALBUMAVOID which I already linked. Binksternet (talk) 16:18, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}.  ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:55, 18 October 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).

Jareddeluxe17 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

I won't add necessary changes again. Jareddeluxe17 (talk) 17:19, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You received warnings with explicit explanations about your behaviour before you were blocked. Thus, it's difficult to believe your behaviour would change now. However, if you wish to submit another unblock request, you are free to do so. I suggest reading Wikipedia's Guide to Appealing Blocks beforehand. Your request should explain what you would do differently if unblocked. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 18:26, 18 October 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.

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).

Jareddeluxe17 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

I am still new to Wikipedia and I am still learning. It would be unfair to block someone who is new and is still learning as they go along. Jareddeluxe17 (talk) 20:27, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Decline reason:

For the same reasons as the previous decline, "I am still learning" rings hollow when you have previously ignored messages attempting to teach you. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:29, 18 October 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.

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).

Jareddeluxe17 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

I just did not understand on those "explicit explanations". They did not feel like teaching me, but more like etching me out. Jareddeluxe17 (talk) 21:34, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you:
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. asilvering (talk) 05:26, 19 October 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.

It's okay and no worries: We've found a way to stop the disruption independently of your understanding. You may like to use the two weeks, or at least a more significant portion of them than has passed so far, to re-read the advice that had been given above, and to take it as actual advice rather than an unpleasant annoyance. Regarding the content of your unblock requests, part of the advice that had been given to you before each subsequent request was related to WP:GAB, which, as you still create requests that can be declined with a standard {{Decline reason here}} template, also doesn't seem to have been properly read. Take your time. There is no urgency, at least not for the rest of the community and the encyclopedia, in unblocking you. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 04:42, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Real Love (Beatles song), without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources to see how to add references to an article. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 19:29, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

First off, explain to me why would it make more sense for a BBC playlist controversy to belong in the "later remixes" section and not the "release" section. It was clear that someone just made the "later remixes" part its own section and didn't see the "BBC playlist" below it. I was just fixing that, so don't you dare change that. Jareddeluxe17 (talk) 23:54, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions to Trust (Phillips, Craig and Dean album). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing as a live article at this time because it needs additional sources to meet WP:NALBUM. 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. • Quinn (talk • it/its) 02:27, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for not deleting this article. It's not gonna be easy finding additional information and sources, but hopefully we can find enough for it to be official. Jareddeluxe17 (talk) 03:24, 3 May 2026 (UTC)