User talk:Kazaro

The official logo of GMA is the 2D version, not the 3D one. Plus, the 2D version is already in SVG format as preferred by Wikipeia. They don't use the 3D version on official documents, only on posters. Please see the official website of GMA Network and GMA News to see what I'm talking about. -WayKurat (talk) 12:23, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

• WayKurat, The 2D version were used until 2011, and the present logo were currently used to their television. As you can see the logo were already placed on the top right hand corner is the 3D version^[1]. The 3D version is the current logo of GMA Network. Kazaro (talk) 23:21, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

The 2D version is still the official one. The 3D version is only used from time to time and for aesthetic purposes. You cannot just remove the 2D logo and replace it with something that you just uploaded recently without proper consensus. It will be proper if you discuss it to the page's talk page before you replace something significant. -WayKurat (talk) 02:03, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

WayKurat, The link I provided has enough information see^[2]. As you can see the logo were placed on the top right hand corner to the videos. The 2D version are being replaceable to the present logo which is the logo I provided to the article. Other things I want to talk about is the info box of Alyas Robin Hood you have to watch those before you submit because the last time I check there's a missing code you reverted to that article. Kazaro (talk) 02:27, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Again, please wait for a consensus first BEFORE you re-add your logo. There must be an agreement with other Wikipedia users what logo should be used. Adding it back can be considered as edit-warring. I have added the discussion at the GMA Network's talk page as well as the WT:PINOY talk page. You can be blocked if you keep on re-adding that logo without proper consensus. -WayKurat (talk) 05:20, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

WayKurat, Again this might not reconsidering to Blocked my account because the information I provided has enough information. So, If you think I made a mistake for replacing the article's logo I will not revert it back even thought that logo you place needed to replace to it's current logo this year that I provided to the article. But this is not the end of discussion yet. Kazaro (talk) 19:55, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Are you threatening me on this comment? I am seeking consensus on that logo you just keep on adding and you threat anyone who will remove that logo, even if only one other user commented on that logo. One comment does not constitute a proper consensus. -WayKurat (talk) 07:26, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

WayKurat, I'm not threatening you as well who will remove this logo but it seems that the company use that logo in their profile at PSE. So the consensus you talk about didn't receive your report to their talk page. Kazaro (talk) 05:42, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. -WayKurat (talk) 09:37, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

The use of an is actually incorrect for this sort of usage. El_C 09:50, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at GMA Entertainment TV shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. 86.20.193.222 (talk) 16:12, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

86.20.193.222 and El_C, did you even look at my contribution? They even reverted the other article words I replace because of the wrong or misspelled sentences. BTW I can't revert that all because WayKurart are reverting all of the article without looking at them. I can't even remember all of those article I have been edit yesterday. This edit war is possibly mistake since I'm just looking the passion of how they paraphrase the word. It's possible I made a mistake from replacing them all to "an". Thanks for letting me know, since I don't trust WayKurat but it's okay to made a mistake. Kazaro (talk) 00:24, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Click on your Contributions to find out everything you did yesterday. Please do not edit war, especially if it's about something you're unsure of. Thanks. El_C 00:30, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

Yes, I did look at your contribs. You repeated the same edit 3 times, changing "a" to "an" in the sentence, GMA Entertainment TV Group' (known as GMA Entertainment TV) is a television production company. .

The three-revert rule says, if you undo changes 3 times within 24 hours, you're likely to be blocked. I wanted to warn you, before that happened.

The best way to avoid the problem is as follows;

If you make an edit, and someone undoes it, do not repeat the edit until you have discussed it and reached an agreement. If you can't agree, ask for opinions from other editors.

I hope that helps, 86.20.193.222 (talk) 11:25, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article GMA Worldwide 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/GMA Worldwide 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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:00, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Onel5969, This is my first time to collaborate not to delete this article. As the web references may shown that this is an actual company. If you were suggesting or nominating to delete this article. I might have to say this is unbelievable.

Hello, Kazaro. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, List of mergers and acquisitions by GMA Network Inc., for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

1. edit the page
2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:57, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Kazaro,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether GMA Entertainment TV should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GMA Entertainment TV .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks,

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:19, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi. You have been blocked indefinitely for repeated copyrights violations. I'm sorry, but we do require a bare minimum threshold of competence to participate here. Thanks. El_C 21:09, 4 March 2017 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I want to get unblock, and I will follow the guidelines carefully Kazaro (talk) 23:05, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Unfortunately quite often blocked editors say they will follow the guidelines but don't actually understand them. Thus I'll have to ask you to explain how, if unblocked, your future edits will differ from your previous ones that led to the block. Huon (talk) 23:33, 4 March 2017 (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.

• Note for future reference: Kazaro was indefinitely blocked based on the evidence and consensus in this ANI thread: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Non sense tags. Permalink as of this moment: . – Softlavender (talk) 08:13, 5 March 2017 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I want to get unblocked. I will promise to be kind to each others, and I will not do this again.

Decline reason:

That does not even attempt to show that you understand why you were blocked - you were not blocked for not being kind to others. You were blocked after multiple denials that you were doing anything wrong, so you would need to explain what it is you now understand was wrong, explain your understanding of Wikipedia's copyright policy, and explain how you would change your approach to writing article content if unblocked. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:54, 5 March 2017 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I will promise to not copy and paste the words from the website to create the article. I don't really want to get blocked I just want the article to get improve. I will not do this again, I will just come up my own words from the website not just copy and pasting

Decline reason:

There are other issues that were reasons for your block which you have not addressed, for example poor quality edits to BLPs. Moreover your comments about copyright are not convincing. You say that you will not copy and paste; however at the ANI you insisted that an incident where you copied several paragraphs and changed only a handful of words was not a copyvio. Before unblocking I would want to see you demonstrate a good understanding of why close paraphrasing is not allowed. BethNaught (talk) 19:08, 5 March 2017 (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.

• Note to administrators: Kazaro was indefinitely blocked based on the evidence and consensus in this ANI thread: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Non sense tags. Permalink as of this moment: . As the blocking admin, El C, states in that thread, Kazaro was not blocked merely for copyvio, but for "issues pertaining to overall competence", which are well covered that thread. – Softlavender (talk) 18:51, 5 March 2017 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I will promise to not copy and paste the words from the website to create the article. I don't really want to get blocked I just want the article to get improve. I will not do this again, I will just come up my own words from the website not just copy and pasting. I will follow the wikipedia guidelines. The reason why I get blocked because of the article I created that needs to get improved and just copy the word from the website sources. I will cite the sources not just copy and pasting it to the article.

Decline reason:

Closing request left open afer Talk Page privileges were revoked. See decisions above and ANI thread for clarification of decision. Alexf^(talk) 09:12, 11 June 2017 (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.

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Unitel Pictures 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/Unitel Pictures 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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:20, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Meant-to-be.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:30, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Meant-to-be-cast.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:30, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

---

UTRS appeal #17685 was submitted on Mar 05, 2017 09:06:59. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 09:06, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Legallyblind.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:34, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Fullhousetonight.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:16, 3 April 2018 (UTC)