Fodient

Hello Fodient, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! VanTucky Talk 00:33, 10 October 2007 (UTC) Getting started Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page How you can help Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

Hello Fodient. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding repeated re-creation of a deleted article. The discussion can be found under the topic Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Repeated re-creation of deleted article Russel Timoshenko. You are free to comment at the discussion, but please remember to keep your comments within the bounds of the civility and "no personal attack" policies. Thank you.

--WWGB 02:44, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Three-revert rule

I suggest you read this rule before you are banned. 203.220.10.226 04:28, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. 220.253.76.67 22:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

What others are saying about YOU - Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Belarus#Fodient 220.253.76.67 22:37, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

3RR again

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Deor 15:01, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule . Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

In September I created a page for a police officer that was murdered in New York City named Russel Timoshenko. I don't know him nor do I have any connection to him. This page was unfortunately erased. Since that happened I decided to create one with an alternate spelling of his name Russell Timoshenko. This was erased as well. Since those pages were erased and I don't have authority to recreate them, I have had no choice but to add this notable qualifying person to lists on which he was previously attached. When saying notable, I mean this person's death was on the front page of every NYC newspaper for over a week. That is a lot more notability than more than half the people on those lists and more than half the articles on wikipedia for that matter. If someone should get blocked its editor WWGB, he has made a conscious effort to vandalize my contributions. I can only assume that he does out of request from editor:CyntWorkStuff brought to his attention due to her frustration with my contributions of Labor Day Carnival. That is not a blind guess-its hinted in their talk pages.

Decline reason:

Your request does not address why your edits did not violate the WP:3RR rule. That rule also applies to content disagreements. See WP:DR for how to proceed in such cases. — Sandstein 18:43, 10 November 2007 (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.

Final warning

Per this Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Russel_Timoshenko, the clear consensus is that while the death of Officer Timoshenko is tragic, he is not notable enough to merit an article in the encyclopedia. This includes including inserting links to the non-existant into other articles, which you have done repeatedly. Please see WP:BLP1E. Any further insertions will be viewed as disruption and may result in you getting blocked again. Please stop. henrik•talk 19:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Last chance

I blocked you after you resumed your editing patterns directly after a block. However, per another administrator's warning ebove, I have unblocked you so that you can contribute constructive edits to Wikipedia. Any continuation, however, will result in an immediate and indefinite block. Please try to improve Wikipedia rather than disrupting it. Thankyou, ELIMINATORJR 19:40, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Welcome!

Welcome Fodient

Thank you for joining the Law Enforcement Wikiproject on the English Wikipedia! As you would have guessed we are a group dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to law enforcement

Since you now are a member you get to have our userbox or banner on your userpage! To add these use:

1. {{User WikiprojectPolice}} -- our userbox, or
2. {{Lawenforcementmember}} -- our member banner.

Here are some more tips to get you started:

• Creating articles: See here for articles you can create, but don't forget to add [[Category:Law enforcement]] to the base of the article and our project banner to the talk page of the article using {{WPLE}}
• Participate on our talk page: It is highly recommended that you watchlist it. There are also a number of small projects on the talk page as well that may be of interest to you!
• Check the bulletin board: For news and information, please read the bulletin board regularly or add it to you user-page using: {{Lawenforcementbulletinboard}}
• Improve an article: Click here to find all the really short articles, pick one from that list and improve it. When you are done go to the talk page of that article and removed {{WPLE| class=Stub}} the bit in bold and another editor will be along to see how well you have done and reassess the article to a much higher class.

All members are reminded:

• That this project aims for: No vandalism, no conflict and if particular articles in this project are suffering from vandalism, edit wars or talk-page abuse, please add it to the Article Watch List

In a nutshell:

• Join, Create & Assess
• Members in trouble can go to:

1. SGGH ^speak! (Project Coordinator)
2. Dep. Garcia ( Talk + | Help Desk | Complaints ) (Assistant Coordinator)
3. Or any project coordinator listed on the main project page or members page.

Again, Thank you and Welcome

WikiProject Law Enforcement Barnstar Proposal Poll

Hello there Fodient,

We here at Wikiproject Law Enforcement are currently in the process of deciding wither or not to make this WikiProject Law Enforcement's official Barnstar award. Being that you are a member of Wikiproject Law Enforcement, we are humbly asking you to voice your opinion here about our new Barnstar.

Thank You and All the Best, Mifter (talk) 20:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

--Mifter (talk) 20:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Church of the Resurrection (Kew Gardens, Borough of Queens, New York)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Church of the Resurrection (Kew Gardens, Borough of Queens, New York), and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://resurrection-richmondhill.e-paluch.com/history.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 02:40, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Somno (talk) 02:38, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

January 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Richard Gere has been reverted, as it introduced negative or controversial biographical material without providing a reliable source for this information. Wikipedia requires that all such material be sourced to address the issue of libel. Thank you. Chasingsol^(talk) 10:38, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Please stop adding unreferenced controversial biographical content to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Richard Gere. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Kelly ^hi! 07:36, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did to Richard Gere, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Kelly ^hi! 18:31, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

To amplify these warnings: the material and sourcing you're adding violate Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living people. Wikipedia is not a tabloid or a venue to repeat rumors, even if those rumors are mentioned in motion pictures or animated TV comedies. If you continue edit-warring to insert this inappropriate material, your account will be blocked from editing. Please consider discussing these concerns on the article talk page. MastCell ^Talk 18:54, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for edit-warring to reinsert material which violates the biographies of living persons policy, despite warnings and in the setting of prior blocks for edit-warring. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. MastCell ^Talk 06:22, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Talkback|Nsaa|Thanks for the invite, but...

An IP claims to be you at

Hello, Fodient. You have new messages at Nsaa's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

March 2009

This is your only warning.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did to Richard Gere, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Crotchety Old Man (talk) 11:55, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Removal of most of Jennifer Fitzgerald

Judging by your edit history, it seems to be a rational conclusion that you did this as a way of disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate a point. Please cease and desist, or you will be blocked again. Daniel Case (talk) 22:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

That article has a reliable source, a magazine article which discussed the rumor in great detail and attempted to assess its truth, itself relying on other sources, and doesn't say they were false. Nor was it the only article to do so. That's more than one instance of non-trivial coverage.

Whereas, as the about.com page you've used as a source mentions, the one attempt to verify left the National Enquirer reporter "convinced he was chasing an urban legend." (If you can find that Palm Beach Post story, and it's devoted totally to that rumor, you might have a more defensible source, but since as the about.com page notes Gere wasn't the only subject of that one (I do remember that myself from that era), I really don't think it's relevant. Two mentions in pop culture are also hardly enough to establish it as something meriting mention. Frankly, a whole section devoted to it, even just a paragraph, is a violation of WP:UNDUE in a BLP article, I think. (I suppose a better place to discuss it might be a more detailed, and thoroughly sourced, article on "gerbilling" as an urban legend, or a section in some other article with a redirect). Daniel Case (talk) 08:00, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Please don't use your IP to do this, either. Thank you. Daniel Case (talk) 08:03, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

And apparently this wasn't the first time, either. Daniel Case (talk) 08:08, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Anthony Bologna

I was just copy-n-pasting those over myself (just about to click "save") and I saw you had done it, funny. Thanks for adding those. LoveUxoxo (talk) 01:05, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Frank Morano for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Frank Morano 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/Frank Morano (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

Oaktree b (talk) 02:02, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Craig Robertson Article

Hi, You and I exchanged comments regarding the Craig Robertson article. I now question his notability after I found out that the 2017 Congressional baseball shooter does not even warrant an article here. Check out my comments, I'd be interested to see what you think. Talk:Craig DeLeeuw Robertson Dwain (talk) 14:24, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

August 2023

Your recent editing history at WABC (AM) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. 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; read about 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 you 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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. BlueboyLINY (talk) 16:59, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to User talk:BlueboyLINY has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. BlueboyLINY (talk) 21:36, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Fodient reported by User:BlueboyLINY (Result: ). Thank you. BlueboyLINY (talk) 21:42, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Some of the content you added might not have been good-faith please keep this mind not to add bad-faith edits please and please do not edit war! 98.235.155.81 (talk) 22:40, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Also in this context I was referring to Fodient himself. 98.235.155.81 (talk) 22:41, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Everything I added was in good faith and appropriate. Fodient (talk) 23:48, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Helicopters and NYPD

Use of helicopters to intimidate protesters was made illegal in September, and NYPD's use of the helicopters anyway against pro-Palestine protesters in New York City is in defiance of a court settlement which bans them from flying helicopters over protesters. Perhaps you were unaware; it is impossible to know everything. Nevertheless, I hope that this clarification of the law helps you to understand why I phrased NYPD's tactics as repression, because they are illegal.

Additionally, see here as to why Hell Gate is most likely a RS. You seem to edit for New York City sometimes as well, so this should be good news for you too as it was less clear before.

Best.Computer-ergonomics (he/him; talk; please ping me in replies ) 02:02, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Apologies to post twice on your page, I wanted to avoid confusion. I realized I was reverting your edits too much in a way that seemed rude and I have restored them. Best. Computer-ergonomics (he/him; talk; please ping me in replies ) 12:46, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

@Computer-ergonomics: I support how that section is currently written.Fodient (talk) 12:56, 8 April 2024 (UTC)