Whattfirrad

June 2025

Wikis are not reliable sources per WP:USERG. You and I already had a discussion explaining why you and that wiki are incorrect on the issue of Roy Batty. That makes your continued removal of sourced content based on your original research vandalism. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Xfansd (talk) 22:53, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

I

aveha question do you know the difference between Dio's hair and high Dio's haircut??? High Dio's hair is short and more similar to Roy Batty's haircut. Meanwhile normally Dio's hair is always Long.

Many jojo accounts confirmed araki meant high Dio's haircut. Even jojo wiki confirmed araki meant high Dio's haircut. Why it is so hard for you to understand?? Also why are so rude to me. I'm talking politely and you just insulted me Whattfirrad (talk) 23:19, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

What part of jojo wiki can not be used for content or used to support your arguments on Wikipedia don't you understand? Wikipedia is not the same as that fan wiki. It has rules that must be followed and standards that must be met for content. You said you looked at the interview, that means you know it does not say anything about Dio being "high" and "drinking blood". Therefore your continual removal of that info based on your own original research is vandalism. That's not me talking, that's Wikipedia policy. This would be your second vandalism warning. Xfansd (talk) 00:55, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Dio Brando 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. Magic Fizz ^(talk) 02:34, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

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

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Iiii I I I (talk) 07:27, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Since when is Roy batty a foreign idol lol Whattfirrad (talk) 07:35, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Dio Brando. Iiii I I I (talk) 17:22, 16 June 2025 (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:Whattfirrad reported by User:Magic Fizz (Result: ). Thank you. Magic Fizz ^(talk) 02:35, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

June 2025

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

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:30, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Talk:Dio Brando. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 19:16, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

if it needs saying, accusing others of fellatio isn't considered particularly beneficial to your chances of being taken seriously. at the very least, it tends to get people's opinions disregarded as trolling, though it normally tends to just get them blocked. regardless, i'm sure with that comment that you're not in the mood to actually discuss that matter in any meaningfuly productive way, so i'm not in the mood to go much further with this consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 19:22, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Oh my, I hadn't seen how unproductive their discussion attempts were. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:24, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

can we get a revdel going on that last comment? i'm also willing to bet those don't tend to stick consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 19:26, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for asking; I think revision deletion would be a bit much. It's okay if others can see in the revision history how this user behaved and what led to the sitewide block. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:31, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

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

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:27, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

OK I'll stop lol only on one condition.

User : Iiii_I_I_I OK I'll stop lol only on one condition. Whattfirrad (talk) 20:14, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

iiii i i i isn't an admin, and thus has no input on a block not related to arbcom. if you want to appeal your block, you should read the message tobefree sent, since it contains info on how to do that consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 20:20, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

I don't want to appeal block. I just have one condition and I'll leave forever lol.

Don't mix two interviews together. Can you edit the "with Araki specifically mentioning the short hairstyle and muscles of Rutger Hauer's character Roy Batty from the 1982 film Blade Runner in a separate interview.[4][5]" in other place? Don't mix it with the other interview. Whattfirrad (talk) 20:42, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

protip: don't ask people to edit articles for you while blocked, especially if the block is over that exact subject. that's attempting to make someone else your accomplice consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 21:27, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Ok then you want me to stay ok Whattfirrad (talk) 22:10, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Stop creating false dilemmas here. You won't continue the behavior that led to the block; that's not negotiable, and it's independent of article content. The syntax for requesting an unblock is provided in the boxes above and at WP:GAB. Please don't use your talk page for anything else than creating an unblock request during the block. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:02, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

OK then why don't you fix it? Whattfirrad (talk) 23:06, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

I'll ask someone else to help me edit it then Whattfirrad (talk) 23:05, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. 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 believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:29, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

• Confirmed to Meenaiq.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:29, 24 June 2025 (UTC)