User talk:Lucas J. Goodwin

Welcome!

Hello, Lucas J. Goodwin, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Kylemahar902 (talk) 02:03, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New message to Lucas J. Goodwin

Please see MOS:FLAG. Remsense ‥ 论 21:38, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

April 2025

Hello, I'm Lone-078. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Taurus (ruler), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Lone-078 (talk) 16:12, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Ahmose, son of Ebana, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and to see how to add references to an article. Thank you. Lone-078 (talk) 05:34, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Titus Petronius Secundus, you may be blocked from editing. Lone-078 (talk) 17:17, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can only second this warning. You've been adding info boxes with information that appears to have no source whatsoever to numerous articles. Please stop or this will go to the admins.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:03, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 Tiberianus, you may be blocked from editing. Do not add unnecessary infoboxes based on unsourced information while including non-standard orthography (see here) and imputed dates (eg what this now-blocked editor did). Ifly6 (talk) 05:18, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In general, stop adding infoboxes to every stub you can find.

The purpose of an infobox is to summarize, but not supplant, the key facts that appear in an article. Barring the specific exceptions listed below, an article should remain complete with its infobox ignored. The less information that an infobox contains, the more effectively it serves its purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance. (MOS:INFOBOX)

They are unnecessary and your additions to them are regularly fictitious. This is functionally vandalism. Ifly6 (talk) 05:24, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Another instance of non-standard formatting and fictitious dates. There's no source or even inkling of a statement in the body text supporting the claim in the infobox that Aelius Gallus was born in the 1st century BC and died in the 1st century AD. (That this is "obvious" since it is readily imputable from when he was active is insufficient.) There is nothing whatsoever that he died at Rome. You need sources for all these claims. You've done this across a series of articles and even after editing your user page just today have not made an attempt at all to communicate. Communication is required. Ifly6 (talk) 18:57, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Lone-078 (talk) 07:23, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively as a sockpuppet of User:Loukus99 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Edgenut. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Izno (talk) 17:34, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I only used an IPhone for editing. Lucas J. Goodwin (talk) 17:38, 28 April 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).

Lucas J. Goodwin (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I only have edited on an IPhone

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. Yamla (talk) 17:46, 28 April 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.