User talk:Lividowly64

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Welcome!

[edit]
Hello, Lividowly64!

I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips
  • Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
  • It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
  • If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
  • Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
  • When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
  • If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
  • Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Taabii (talk) 13:48, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2025

[edit]

Information icon Hello, Lividowly64, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Lividowly (Sonic Punch) (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TechnoSquirrel69 about the multiple accounts. I do not have access to Lividowly (Sonic Punch) because I lost the email associated with the username so i made a new one Lividowly (Sonic Punch) (talk) 20:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You've posted this message with the "Sonic Punch" account. Either way, I would recommend you create user pages for each of the accounts identifying the connection between them and refrain from using more than one at a time in order to avoid the appearance of sockpuppetry. If you have any questions, feel free to leave a message at the Teahouse and an experienced editor will help you out. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:09, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
is this the reason why I'm unable to post non free content images Lividowly64 (talk) 15:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

heads-ups of varyingly low minority

[edit]

really, just good things to remember when adding stuff

  • remember to italicize titles of works. this includes "anton" in the context of the franchise (though not when just referring to the rrrred guy)
  • either go easy on primary sources like tweets, or if you want to use a lot of them, it may be a good idea to separate them from secondary ones. in general, an article having more primary sources than secondary ones doesn't make for a good look
  • the possessive form of "it" is "its". you don't say "him's", do you?

consarn (speak evil) (see evil) 12:24, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i really hate to say it, but...

[edit]

you really need to take the manual of style into account, and get a better grasp of the english language. on top of what i mentioned before...

  • remember to maintain formal wording, avoiding terms such as "mom" or "kid" outside of quotations
  • watch your typos. namely...
    • morden → modern
    • it's (as the possessive form of "it") → its (yes, i know i already said it, but it really grinds my gears, bigs my bath, reds my guy, blasts my anton...)
    • occurrense → occurrence
    • recieved → received (though this one is a little understandable, i make this mistake all the time, and need the funny red squiggly lines to notice it)
    • stared → stated
  • watch for repetition ("He felt it that decision improved the soundtrack significantly with his decision.")
  • watch for any given page's variant of english. some are written in tea english, some in burger english, and some even in maple syrup english. antonblast, in this case, is written in murican english
  • use some more commas lol, ain't no one got the lungs to read this stuff
  • again, go easy on primary sources like interviews, tweets, and kickstarter. at the moment, there are more primary sources than secondary ones

it can be a little tiring to have to look at every single one of your edits to antonblast for grammatical mistakes. count this as a formal warning if you're in the mood, don't if you're not consarn (speak evil) (see evil) 14:38, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Antonball Deluxe has been accepted

[edit]
Antonball Deluxe, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Jovanmilic97 (talk) 18:32, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Undertale Overworld.jpg

[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Undertale Overworld.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:19, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

February 2025

[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Friday Night Funkin', disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Jessicapierce (talk) 17:44, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i did mention before that they really should go easy on primary sources, but it doesn't seem to be going anywhere consarn (speak evil) (see evil) 18:46, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Warning icon Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Friday Night Funkin', you may be blocked from editing. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:59, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

dude have you not noticed that there's another citation that cites twitter as well as my edit. right by citation of weekend 1's release. how is it that weekend 1's twitter citation is fine and dandy but this isn't Lividowly64 (talk) 13:16, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's literally right here. on the fnf wikipedia page "On April 30, 2024, the ninth level of the game, titled "WeekEnd 1", was released. This major update to the game featured characters from the Pico's School series: Pico, Nene, and Darnell.[1]" This is hyprocritical. Lividowly64 (talk) 13:18, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
that one isn't exactly fine or dandy either, primary sources are best used extremely sparingly. someone should probably do something about it, and maybe get something better than the current citation 16 consarn (speak evil) (see evil) 13:20, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
and on that note, that paragraph was also followed by unsourced credits, and an entirely unsourced paragraph. off with their heads until non-primary sources can be found, i guess consarn (speak evil) (see evil) 13:23, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You also might want to look up what hypocrisy means. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 13:32, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:06, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're trying to help, but what you're doing is not helping. You've been warned before about trivial coverage and you made an article that is barebones, without any reliable source whatsoever. The WP:BURDEN is on you, not the other way around. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 12:08, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok then, how is List of Dragon Ball soundtracks wikipedia page fine and that also only has primary sources but this isn't, Pizza Tower is a popular enough game to a get a wikipedia page on it's music like with Undertale and Deltarune Lividowly64 (talk) 12:14, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
funnily enough, that list has two templates specifying exactly why it, as it is, is not fine (plus at least one more i could add). popularity ultimately has nothing to do with notability (specifically as defined by wikipedia), which is a problem that's currently been plaguing touhou project in particular (which is at least bigger than pizza tower, antonblast, and deltarune combined, so it should have loads of independent coverage... but actually seems to be sorely lacking in that regard). what everyone's been trying to say is that wikipedia relies on secondary sources, with primary ones being used mostly to supplement them with uncontroversial info (if they're used at all). also the possessive form of "it" is "its", that's gonna grind my gears, iron my hands, devil my gardens, slowroast my sewer, gnome my forest, red my nightless castle, and betray my panic for the rest of eternity consarn (prison phone) (crime record) 12:37, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:WHATABOUTX. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 13:13, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
really, almost every instance of "what about" arguments that i've seen has led me to stuff that's also in need of improving, but that's probably besides the point consarn (prison phone) (crime record) 13:22, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I again had to undo one of your edits. A developer making a new game that is not connected to Pizza Tower shouldn't be mentioned in the article. A tweet is a primary source and that is original research. Please, take a moment to read the guidelines. You're not helping. Wikipedia is not a fansite or a blog. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 14:37, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ @FNF_Developers (May 1, 2024). "FIRST UPDATE OF NEW RETURN" (Tweet). Retrieved April 20, 2024 – via Twitter.

Orphaned non-free image File:Undertale Overworld.jpg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Undertale Overworld.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free 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) 03:41, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: List of Pizza Tower Soundtracks (February 26)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Liance was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
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.
~Liancetalk 20:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Lividowly64! 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! ~Liancetalk 20:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Pizza Tower Soundtrack Album Cover.png

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Pizza Tower Soundtrack Album Cover.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free 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) 03:43, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Deltarune Concept Art.png

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Deltarune Concept Art.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free 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) 03:12, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 2025

[edit]

Hello, I'm Serge, an Admin here on Wikipedia.

  1. Please see MOS:VG and WP:IUP. We need to limit non-free images on articles. That means only one cover art. Do not overtly violate the image policy and manual of style again.
  2. See the concept of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Just because you observe something somewhere, doesn't make it right, and doesn't justify doing it elsewhere. You may have simply observed an error that needs fixing. Or there could be context that makes a difference. It's not enough to simply say "I saw it somewhere, so I'm justified in doing the same here".
  3. I'm a bit concerned, between this, and the number of warnings you've gotten on this talk page in a relatively short amount of time. I realize that it takes time to learn how Wikipedia works, but you need to make a greater effort to learn things. If issues like this keep occurring, and it doesn't appear that you're making an effort to improve, you could be in danger of getting your account temporarily blocked from editing. So please change this.

Thank you. Sergecross73 msg me 15:38, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Their behaviour continues, Sergecross73. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 15:07, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'm concerned about this unexplained edit. A bit concerning you felt this was a reliable source too. I need you to explain these edits, Lividowly64. Sergecross73 msg me 16:39, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sergecross73 it isn't a reliable source? Lividowly64 (talk) 19:01, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How do you identify reliable sources? This appears to be a basic blog literally anyone could open up and write. Sergecross73 msg me 20:43, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is this really all the explanation you have for these two edits? Sergecross73 msg me 22:51, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, if you don't wish to engage, fine, but the next time you add an obviously unreliable/unusable source, your account is going to be temporarily blocked from editing, because upon reviewing your edits, I don't believe you've made any effort to understand what sources Wikpiedia deems usable, and that's not acceptable. I recommend studying WP:RS and WP:VG/S. Sergecross73 msg me 19:00, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
since it's been continuing, i'll drop some stuff
  • wp:sps: info on the use of self-published sources (like blogs and stuff)
  • wp:vgsources: a good ol' list of sources based on their reliability (or lack thereof). if a source isn't there and doesn't meet any criteria for a pretty much guaranteed unreliable source, it might be a good idea to bring it up for discussion
the latter is a really good link to have in hand, so i'd almost recommend keeping it in your bookmarks or something consarn (prison phone) (crime record) 14:32, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mindwave

[edit]

Firstly, thank you for helping the Mindwave (video game) draft and helping it reach a completed state. Despite this, I would like to point out that you probably should've chosen the "Submit for review" option instead, as drafts don't usually just get published right away and need to be reviewed in some form to check that they are suitable for the mainspace. Especially since I specifically stated in my last edit summary that the draft was "very close to being ready for submission". However, I see no issues with the article as is, so there should be no trouble for now. Please take this into account in future, as I notice that a lot of your other edits have been seen as non-constructive. Thanks again for your help, and I hope that you continue to contribute to the article in a constructive manner going forward! SleepDeprivedGinger (talk) 20:48, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Sonic 1 JP Cover Art.png

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sonic 1 JP Cover Art.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free 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) 17:33, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Sonic 2 JP Cover Art.jpg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sonic 2 JP Cover Art.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free 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) 17:34, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

[edit]

This edit introduced unsourced content to Wikipedia. As your talk page shows, you've received countless warnings about unsourced or poorly sourced content additions to Wikipedia, and have generally refused to engage in discussion about it. Since discussion has failed to stop your disruptive editing, blocks will start being enforced to stop it. You are blocked for 3 days. When you return, I hope that you'll make sure all edits have reliable sources that verify all information added. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 18:12, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73 how is this an unreliable source?? I literally used the source that was already in the article that was already classfied as a primary source, a source from scott the woz himself???? listen I get why I was warned in the past but this makes no sense. please unblock me, I literally haven't done anything wrong today. Lividowly64 (talk) 21:34, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You did not add a source for the addition "Woz as well as sneak peeks to new Scott the Woz episodes". Sergecross73 msg me 21:39, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sergecross73 oh that was a mistake that honestly i somehow forgot to put a citation for that. Lividowly64 (talk) 21:43, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you've been given a lot of guidance about our sourcing policies and guidelines on this talk page, so this'll be a good time to stop and take some time to learn them. Sergecross73 msg me 21:49, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sergecross73. With this edit, it looks like Lividowly64 still does not understand (or does not want to understand) what a reliable source is. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 14:45, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, especially since I specifically expressed concern about their belief that that source was reliable/usable, and they refused to meaningfully engage. Blocked again, this time for 1 week. Sergecross73 msg me 14:50, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
d*ng, that's a bummer. admittedly, i'm not entirely sure if this is an idht issue or just an overly excited editor, but either way, i'm not a fan of having to review someone's edits
to lividowly, one good thing to keep in mind when seeing a source you know is unreliable (which i will be actively surprised if you didn't, considering how clear guidelines are about this) in an article is to remove it (or ideally replace it with one you know is reliable), as opposed to using its use as justification to use it more consarn (prison phone) (crime record) 15:17, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mettaton (June 10)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Vrxces was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Character notability against the WP:GNG is always a tricky thing, but I'd say this unfortunately falls pretty short. The article is significantly plot heavy (see WP:NOTPLOT) and despite the content suggesting the character is "generally well received" and therefore has secondary reception, the 'Reception' section is really a 'Promotion' section where all of the reliable sourcing is about figurine production. There's just not enough here to suggest the character is notable. Is there significant coverage from reliable sources like those in WP:VG/S about the character?
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.
ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 21:23, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mettaton (June 18)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CanonNi was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Needs sources specifically about Mettaton, not lists of characters or the game as a whole.
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.
'​'​'[​[User:CanonNi]​]'​'​' (💬 • ✍️) 01:05, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:God Damn it kris where the fuck are we meme.jpeg

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:God Damn it kris where the fuck are we meme.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free 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) 02:15, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kris_(Deltarune) has an RfC

[edit]

Kris_(Deltarune) has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Eldomtom2 (talk) 01:28, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 2025

[edit]

Information icon not actually using a template for this (because i haven't found it), but...

please don't publish drafts to mainspace after they've been declined, especially not without addressing the concerns that led to its declining. in those cases, it's preferable to work on the draft in draftspace and continue with the afc process consarn (grave) (obituary) 00:22, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is doubly true if said drafts have sourcing issues, as you're responsible for that if you're the one doing the publishing, and you've already got 2 blocks in for unsourced/poorly sourced editing. You need to be very careful on this sort of stuff. Sergecross73 msg me 15:35, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
oh that's where the claim of you warning me this month came from. I'll admit, I completely missed this warning Lividowly64 (talk) 17:47, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

[edit]

I did a review of your recent edits. It looks like you've repeatedly added unsourced content to articles. You've been warned and even blocked twice for this. I don't know how to make it any more clear to you that this is not acceptable. You're blocked for 1 month. The next one will be indefinite, so please finally address this should you return after your block. Sergecross73 msg me 13:12, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

as someone who's been involved in this for a while, i'll admittedly disagree with this block's rationale (though not with the block itself). i think the problem was less "unsourced content", and more "overreliance on primary sources" (plus the rare copyvio i guess). granted, there was a fair bit of the former, but the latter was definitely worse, as it affected articles that were good enough just as much as ones that weren't
...then again, whichever you think the bigger problem was, it was still repeated and not properly addressed, so i'd appreciate an attempt at discussing it consarn (grave) (obituary) 14:14, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm referring to recent edits that were entirely unsourced, such as this or edits that added blocks of unsourced content such as this. Their first block, as seen in the prior section also called "Blocked", was in regards to unsourced edits, and even if the second block was more about using poor sources, the progression from "poorly sourced" to back to "entirely unsourced" is absolutely not the correct direction for someone with 2 prior blocks about sourcing. Sergecross73 msg me 14:59, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sergecross73 when have I added unsourced content. most of the time I use secondary sources while I frequently use primary sources for specific articles. and as for the fnf Wikipedia page. I've added indicators to my sources to express that they're primary sources. Lividowly64 (talk) 15:20, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've learned from my bans and have been more careful to not ensure my edits are of the highest quality. I am genuinely confused on what I've done wrong here Lividowly64 (talk) 15:22, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just linked 2 examples directly above.
  1. This added content without a source.
  2. This edit added a number of blocks of text without any source present. Sergecross73 msg me 15:30, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is only two examples of me not putting sources. I understand you might have a problem with it but you make out to be a frequent situation. And in my defense i didnt think it needed citations as i thought it was general knowledge of the game like listing the amount of levels in a game. I understand you had a problem but to go as far as banning me for editing and even further to ban for a solid month for two instances out of hundreds of edits of no citations, i believe is questionable. Plus other ediors have reverted some of my changes, which i didnt challenge because they too updated the page to be more up to date and not outdated. Lividowly64 (talk) 15:42, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
those are a weird case, as per wp:plotcite, you can sometimes add a small amount of info to an article's plot summary and just pretend it's sourced to the subject itself, and that part of the guide is usually also applied to gameplay summaries... but to my knowledge, those aren't in the game yet, so that doesn't really apply here either way. of course, if secondary sources comment on the upcoming content of that game with the spooky month guys are found, it can then be added, but only to the extent to which they comment on it (or briefer if possible)
in this case, though, they also face another problem, and that's the relatively strict definition of fancruft. intricacies of this sort, unless proven notable, should be kept to a minimum. your edits tend to introduce a lot of info that isn't vital for a basic understanding of something, and they often have primary or no sources behind them, which is why they're usually followed by other people cleaning the ensuing content up or reverting it entirely
also, you're blocked, not banned, there's a difference 'round these parts consarn (grave) (obituary) 17:01, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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).

Lividowly64 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I believe I should be unbanned and that me getting banned is unfair. (I will be repeating what i have said earlier) I have been banned for a month due to "repeatedly added unsourced content to articles." and "poorly sourced" by @Sergecross73. I know I have been banned twice but unlike the previous times where I understand what I have done was wrong, this time I believe the claims for getting myself banned is false and overexaggerated, I know I have responded a little bit rudely in my past bans so I'll ensure I'll be responding as polite as I can, I apologize if it may seem I'm being rude. I'll respond to the first claims first to which Sergecross73 has claimed I "repeatedly added unsourced content to articles." This is false. Sergecross73 has made it out to be that I've in their words "repeatedly" added unsourced content but in reality, they have only given out two examples of this case in here and here. which is not repeatedly but more so of a rare occurrence. I'll admit that I should've used sources to back up my claims but in my defense i didnt think it needed sources as my edits were at the beginning of the page where usually there isn't usually citations that is my bad. But this is not a repeatedly occurrence, in actuality, it's the opposite that being very rare. In the majority of my edits besides the two, Sergecross73 has listed, or other edits I don't remember or which Sergecross73 hasn't listed. It is always been backed with a source from a single to multiple depending on the amount I add to a page. This can be seen in my edits in the development section in Deltarune, the development and music section in Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney and even in the page, that I have recieved this ban for, Friday Night Funkin' where although at first my edits weren't properly sourced have been recently marked with by myself with a primary source indicator to alert readers that the sources are primary which unlike my past edits to the page, haven't been reverted thanks to the indicator. Now, I'll respond to the second claim that my edits are "poorly sourced" This must be referring to the primary sources in the FNF page, this is not a case of poor sources as even tho it's mostly primary sources, I have as said earlier marked the sources as such. I understand that there's a priority of secondary sources over primary as they're more credible well depending on the site and etc. Unfortunately with the FNF page, there isn't that many secondary sources for FNF especially in recent years. I have searched for secondary sources and unfortunately I cannot find them so I had no other choice to use primary sources but I have marked them which hasn't been reverted. Additionally as I stated earlier the other pages, I edit mostly contain secondary sources with a decent amount of primary sources. I hope to have this banned be reverted and I will make sure I cite all my edits for now on unless its to fix grammar. Or at the very least, have the ban be shortened down to a week, as I believe a month ban is extreme especially with my agruements against my ban.Lividowly64 (talk) 16:16, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You are blocked, not banned, blocks and bans are different. I can't say that I disagree with the blocking admin. You seem to be saying that this is unfair because some of your edits are fine- that doesn't matter if you consistently make errors without some effort at improvement. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 09:04, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.

To recap:
After a series of warnings related to no/poor sourcing and original research, the issues did not improve, so they were blocked twice.
I gave them a warning about sourcing again earlier this month when I saw that they they've tried to publish poorly sourced drafts that keep getting rejected.
They didn't response after a couple weeks, so I did a spot check today, and low and behold, I found multiple instances of unsourced content additions again after my comment earlier this month.
This is absolutely a recurring issue that this editor refuses to take seriously. Blocks get successively longer with each one, so that's why this one was upped to a month. Sergecross73 msg me 16:27, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sergecross73 I have checked and you have not commented earlier this month, unless you have a link to such instance. also the claim "I found multiple instances of unsourced content additions again after my comment earlier this month." is false, or I'd like to believe it is. you have only stated that I have included two instances of unsourced content. I would like to see more instances of me putting out unsourced content. Lividowly64 (talk) 16:35, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I commented in the section "July 2025" directly above your block notification. Sergecross73 msg me 16:39, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sergecross73 however i agree that I shouldn't have published some of my drafts without using the review button. I apologize for that Lividowly64 (talk) 16:37, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sergecross73 But the claim you're making that I have done multiple instances of unsourced content is not true. Lividowly64 (talk) 16:38, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's incorrect to claim this is an isolated occurrence. 2 violations was simply enough to warrant the block considering how many warnings and blocks already issued. There's more.
  • July 14th - this edit introduced unsourced content. (However remants of the "Cowboy segment" can still be seen in-game during the TV World area and Tenna's boss fight in Chapter 3.)
  • July 12th - This edit added (example bloat) without a source.
The more I dig, the more I find. Sergecross73 msg me 16:39, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
the example in July 12th, is not something that needs a citation. It's a villain that vegeta has faced in Dragon Ball daima. Despite Moro and Granloah not having character pages or anything linked relating them, that didnt get cited. There is no need for a citation in that edit. Lividowly64 (talk) 17:14, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
sometimes it's unnessarcy for things to be sourced, it's okay for sometimes for things like referring to the villains a character has faced has no citation or something mostly unused appearing in some form. Look at the story section of alot of Wikipedia pages. They don't usually have any citations Lividowly64 (talk) 17:18, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Or at most only a little bit of citations Lividowly64 (talk) 17:22, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
also those two "violations" are incredibly minor and were resolved with my sourcing or another editor removing the infomation altogether. You are making this into a much bigger deal than it actually is Lividowly64 (talk) 17:20, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You've been repeatedly warned. You've been blocked twice. And after catching you attempting to publish poorly sourced drafts earlier this month, I found four examples of further violations today. And you're trying to frame this as some sort of wrongful block? Sergecross73 msg me 17:33, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I have been warned in the past, been blocked twice in the past. That's old news and i have made sure to be careful. And yes I did publish a draft earlier this month my bad. But I didn't get banned for publishing a draft, i got banned over 4 edits that when you really think about are minor mistakes and aren't frequent. And one of those violations: on July 12 doesn't need a citation. Its not like i have mostly write edits without citations. 97 to 99 percent of my edits contains a citation. Lividowly64 (talk) 17:40, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And yes i am arguing it is a wrongful block Lividowly64 (talk) 17:41, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The other warnings and bans were justified but this one isn't, you could've just warned me to not post edits with no citations unless they absolutely don't need one Lividowly64 (talk) 17:43, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what else to say other than "that's not how it works". Hopefully whoever reviews your unblock request can get through to you better than I've been able to. Sergecross73 msg me 17:58, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:List of Pizza Tower Soundtracks

[edit]

Information icon Hello, Lividowly64. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:List of Pizza Tower Soundtracks, 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) 13:06, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:DELTARUNE Chapter 3-4 OST - Dark Sanctuary.ogg listed for discussion

[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:DELTARUNE Chapter 3-4 OST - Dark Sanctuary.ogg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. λ NegativeMP1 21:43, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Deltarune Cover Art.png listed for discussion

[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Deltarune Cover Art.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. 🌙Eclipse (she/they/all neos • talk • edits) 11:16, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning on unsourced editing

[edit]

I'm concerned that, after all of these warnings and blocks, it appears you've added unsourced content to an article yet again. If it happens again, your account will receive a long-term block. You've got to stop doing this. Sergecross73 msg me 15:37, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Deltarune Cover Art.png

[edit]
⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Deltarune Cover Art.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free 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) 02:09, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]