Thanks for the advice dc banners! - phan1998 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phan1998 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

hello u have an Instagram

U delete my writing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben10LoverGirl (talk • contribs) 20:48, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Henry Hugglemonster has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Henry Hugglemonster was changed by Dcbanners (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.854527 on 2014-10-29T21:59:38+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 21:59, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dcbanners! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join experienced editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from experienced editors. These editors have been around for a long time and have extensive knowledge about how Wikipedia works. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from experts. I hope to see you there! Technical 13 (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:16, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your modification of production codes here is unacceptable. What you are doing is changing existing, sourceable episode numbers by adding A and B cart designations. This is not our job, as it constitutes original research. You don't know if Cartoon Network internally referred to cart A as 101a or if they called it "87Z" for their internal purposes. Unless you can source that each segment was assigned an A/B cart, it needs to be removed. We don't modify content simply because it conforms better to our worldview. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:00, 31 October 2014 (UTC) hi u have an Instagram[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Just Kidding (TV series)‎, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 02:04, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dcbanner, if you're going to remove DVD content from series overviews, please be sure that we don't lose the information entirely. For example in this edit at List of TUFF Puppy episodes, you removed the DVD content, but it does not appear at the main T.U.F.F. Puppy article. A good practice is to move the DVD content to the main article if it doesn't already exist there in a Home media section or similar or to Home media section on the List of episodes article per MOS:TV#Series overview (Miscellaneous section). Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:07, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dcbanner, you said that I needed to add a reference for the episode Baileywhoops. Well I added the reference, I was getting the information off the Baileywhoops page on Disney Wiki in case there was any curiosity towards it. I understand that this may have bothered you so I hope that this will fix the problem you had with my edit. I hope that there isn't a problem with using Disney Wiki as a reference, mostly because I find it the most trustworthy place for Sofia the First information. Ichigo341578926 (talk) 21:35, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I'm sorry I wasn't so sure if Disney Wiki would be considered a reliable source or not. I got the summary for the Episode Bailywhoops from a TV Guide like webcite this time I didn't add a director or writer this time. And I completely understand why the directors and writers information shouldn't be on there. I'm sorry if I inconvenienced you in any way with this. I understand that I may have caused you quiet some annoyance with this, but please understand that all I want is to get this information known. Trust me I wouldn't want to give any false information on Sofia the First, because I am a very big fan of it. Oh and this might not mean much but the commercial for the episode could have been used as a reference for writing the summary upon retrospect. But yet again sorry if I caused you any trouble, and about all the sorry's that are in this message. Ichigo341578926 (talk) 21:30, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page List of programs broadcast by Teletoon has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Thank you. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 14:48, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm letting you know that the episodes of Legends of Chima you are talking about were there when the show had started and nobody else was readding the synopsis to each one. The ones in Season One were the ones the other editors had worked on back when the show was on weeknights. If you prefer to write in the detailed synopsis for those episodes, go right ahead. Did I leave anything out? --Rtkat3 (talk) 15:49, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stop making up numberings and edit warring or you could get blocked. DO THEY AIR ON TV SEPRETLY??!! Chasbo123 (talk) 05:15, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Phineas and Ferb (season 4) 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 get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. — MusikAnimal ^talk 20:21, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. ₂₃W 03:37, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Doc McStuffins premiered first met UK, not US. I can not put a signature because it is urgent.

• UK: June, 2011.
• US: March 12, 2012.

Why isn't Tumblr a reliable source? It's the official Frederator Studios site. Also I wrote that it's gonna air on Nov 20 in Germany and Austria (my current location). Please go to the german Wikipedia episode list, and here is a german tvguide (this site doesn't have the english title yet). H8149 (talk) 14:33, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Before you go reverting any more changes, please take note of the show's talk page and edit history, as there's currently an ongoing dispute regarding sources. Also, even if you change TVDB to Zap2It, please don't remove the episode citations in the title sources, as they need to remain intact to source the writers for the episodes as well. -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 20:28, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User_page_review_request.2C_Dcbanners regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --SCalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 23:10, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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:Dcbanners_reported_by_User:Scalhotrod_.28Result:_.29. Thank you. --SCalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 23:10, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The result of the 3RR case was three days of full protection of Sonic Boom (TV series). Here is the permanent link to the case. Since you were a party to the dispute, it would be helpful if you would join in at Talk:Sonic Boom (TV series)#Recent page protection. People are asking if there are situations where references can be removed. If I recall correctly this is an area where you did some reverts. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 16:59, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I previously left a message on this talk page about the Legends of Chima episodes, how they were there back when Season One was airing on weeknights, and offering you to write the episodes in your own words. As for the bios, they were collected and added by those who seen the episode. What do you prefer? Black bios? If you want to try to rewrite the bios that you think are copyvios your way, go right ahead. Did I leave anything out? --Rtkat3 (talk) 23:51, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain why you made this edit? As I explained in my edit summary, which can be seen in the diff provided, there is no source in the article for the number of episodes in season 1. I added {{citation needed}}, so an inline citation should have been supplied, per Wikipedia:Verifiability, which says "any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material". Removal of such templates without correcting the identified problem usually warrants a templated warning such as {{Uw-tdel2}}. Without a source, claiming December 4, 2014 as the finale date is WP:SYNTH, or would be if you had added a source in the edit. Sources must directly support claims and, as I also indicated, the citation that was previously in the article did not. Finally, per WP:TVUPCOMING we don't include series overview table rows when there are no episodes for an upcoming season. All of this was explained in my edit summary, so I'm curious as to why you reverted without any explanation. As a separate issue, please note that {{start date}} can only be used once per table row. We use {{end date}} for season end dates, when we can verify them. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:38, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Craig McCracken announced a long time ago that Season 1 has 39 episodes. He said that "The Gift" would air as the finale. Here is my source: https://twitter.com/CrackMcCraigen/status/528669370017255424

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:Dcbanners_reported_by_User:Scalhotrod.2C_2nd_report_for_same_activity.2C_same_article. Thank you. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 17:50, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Without taking any sides on this issue, as an experienced editor I would recommend this, Dcbanners: Wikipedia is not in any rush. There are no deadlines. Sometimes we have to go through lengthy discussion to arrive at a conclusion, even if it was the conclusion we knew was right to begin with. Cooler heads prevail at Wikipedia, as does patience. Just a thought. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:57, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dc, I think you might want to consider taking the high road and restoring the Phineas article back to the paired version pending the outcome of the RfC. While I know this is an irritating suggestion that isn't emotionally satisfying, I think doing so will go a long way in showing good faith, and may help reduce the amount of bickering on the page. Per WP:BRD, when we make a bold change and it gets reverted, rather than resubmitting it and asserting the correctness of our version, we would leave the first version and open a discussion on the talk page. Since there is no deadline, leaving the first version isn't terribly problematic, and if the RfC turns in favor of your position, you could always change it back. That's my unsolicited, but experienced advice to you. Please mull it over. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:48, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your contributions on List of The Next Step episodes! I've known for many months that the article needed a lot of improvements, considering the episode was created by a fan and edited by fans with no experience in editing. I sincerely thank you, and I hope we get to work together on that page. Callmemirela (talk) 23:28, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this edit of yours in the Talk:Phineas and Ferb (season 4) discussion is irritating to me. Users who participate in these discussions should be able to express themselves without having to resort to copy/pasting other users' comments. I think you should strike out the comment, (don't remove it) and add your own words instead. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:31, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I see you are deleting the DVD release dates from many episode articles, including ours, so may I ask why did you do that? Should DVD release dates only be on the main series article since I'm sure many series on Wikipedia have them in their episodes articles too. Giggett (talk) 19:35, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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 your voluntary restriction on Sonic Boom (TV series) and Talk:Sonic Boom (TV series). The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Dcbanners_reported_by_User:TheMeaningOfBlah_.28Result:_.29. Thank you. TheMeaningOfBlah (talk) 21:30, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have blocked you for 48 hours for violating the editing restriction you agreed to here. After you agreed, you edited the Talk page of Sonic Boom (TV series). Your appeal rights may be found at WP:GAB.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:46, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You reverted a change that I made to the Thundermans' episode "Crime After Crime" regarding the Upside Down running gag. Your edit comment was "Trivia". I totally disagree with this assessment. There are at least 11 upside down elements in the show, including some major items, such as a Dr. Colosso (the rabbit) and the statue in the park. I believe that my edit to this Wikipedia article was appropriate in that:

• The edit described the sub-plot
• The edit did not contain any spoilers
• The edit gave readers of the article incentive to see the episode again, in case they missed it.
• The edit allowed memory-challenged readers to quickly identify which of the Thunderman's episodes contained this gaff.

Please respond to this. I will look for your response before reinstating my edit. Best regards, --OhioFred (talk) 14:48, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Hi OhioFred, though yours was clearly a good-faith edit, I don't particularly understand the value of this addition either. We're not here to give readers "incentive" to see the episodes again--we're an encyclopedia--delivering incentive is what marketing departments do. Spoilers aren't an issue per WP:SPOILER. We don't edit with memory-challenged readers in mind. There's no clear indication that upside-down props are a story point, i.e. that they impact the story line, so without any connective tissue the content comes off as trivial. If this upside-down running gag gained major press coverage or something, you might have a stronger argument. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:28, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dcbanners, Please restore the episode order by airdate before the newly added titles from January. If episodes were aired out of order, that should be noted by their production codes. The major cable networks such at AT&T are going by the airdate order for their numbering. -AngusWOOF (talk) 22:48, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I raised the issue over at the talk page, and put in a footnote about the proposed scrambling of episodes. -AngusWOOF (talk) 00:26, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

HELLO.DCBANNERS.I AM THE ONE WHO MADE THE EDIT ON THE THE REGULAR SHOW SEASON 6 AND YOU ARE THE ONE WHO REMOVED IT.AND HERE IS RELIABLE SOURCE TO PROVE THAT MY EDIT IS CORRECT:

GO TO http://tvschedule.zap2it.com/tv/regular-show/episode-guide/EP01321635?aid=tvschedule new episodes to be released are there.

Make a new table for these new episodes on season 6 episode list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.97.102.24 (talk) 10:27, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of a form letter from me to you (don't go poking around in my edit history or it'll get even more obvious how much of a form letter it is!) to wish you happy holidays, a Merry Christmas, a Happy Hanukkah, a Happy December, Happy Snow, Happy Sunshine, and an otherwise generally happy end to 2014. Thanks for all the constructive editing, support and civil discourse. Here's to another year of assuming good faith of one another. Incidentally, Dcbanners, with the exception of your edit-warring block, you're doing a very good job. Don't forget to add WT:TV to your watchlist and participate in discussions! Take care, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:58, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I edited this page and added the season 4 parts and I've seen your message claiming it to be fake. I will get to adding references, but I must say that the info is not false. I have seen the first 2 episodes. You are not allowed to send links of videos of TV shows that have been uploaded, but I can show this: http://www.cartoonnetworkasia.com/tv/schedule/ - if you find the LEGO Ninjago part of today's schedule and click 'See all showings', you can see that on Jan 03 they air "The Invitation" episode 35. I'm not sure if this real evidence, but it's there and it is currently only airing in Asia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by UltramanAce3245 (talk • contribs) 23:48, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dcbanners,

I am conducting research about newcomers to Wikipedia and I was hoping to ask you some questions. I’ve noticed you’ve had some good activity recently. Is there any chance you have time in the next month to speak with me? If you are interested or have any questions, please email me at gmugar [at] syr.edu or leave a message on my talk page.

I hope to be in touch soon,

Gabrielm199 (talk) 22:55, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

if you continue to protect Wikipedia, as you did at Regular Show (season 6), Wikipedia will be acquired by Hub Television Networks, as admins would not edit on Wikipedia. 190.253.179.216 (talk) 16:49, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back! Keep a cool head! [[File:|18px|link=]] Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:55, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the List of Teen Titans Go! episodes page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error (help). ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The retweets were done by writer Shea Fontana on the series, and can be verified by Zap2It, but the one regarding the scheduling has been removed as it has already aired at that time spot. I've also added a source from Tom Ruegger concerning Jimmy Weldon's role in the series. These are reliable sources. -AngusWOOF (talk) 15:16, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic (season 5), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stephen Davis. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dc, a note: The dash used in date ranges like here should be endashes (2014–15), not emdashes (2014—15). These have always tripped me up as well, so I thought I'd pass along the info. WP:DATERANGE is the relevant guideline. Happy editing, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:39, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of programs broadcast by American Broadcasting Company may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *''[[Shark Tank]]'' (August 9, 2009–present)<ref>{{cite web|last=Hibberd|first=James|date=May 10, 2012|url=http://insidetv.ew.com/2012/05/10/abc-

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:40, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you have recently left a note in my talk page regarding unsourced content. You said I was to reach you if I thought you made a mistake. I don't think you did, however, I mistakenly took for granted the fact that the source which I took those information was contained in the previous season article, so it didn't have to be repeated on season 2. Nevertheless, in the same way we take off the source for the eisode's names, writers, directors and air dates once they air, we take off the source for the production code as well. This information is given at the end of the credits on every episode. Please, don't take this as a confront, since I only want to help, and give me your thoughts about it so I can improve my Wiki editing. Thank you - Artmanha (talk) 20:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I thought you may like to voice your opinon on a matter that is currently being debated over at the DC comic book character Katana's Talk page. It concerns Arrow. Thank you and cheers, LLArrow (talk) 23:02, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dcbanners,

I have reverted your edits to Food Network and HGTV and wanted to converse with you as to why I did so. Although you are correct in that the main focus of the two articles is their availability and existence in the U.S., the addition of the international availability of the channels in the InfoBox does not necessarily affect the relevance of the article. If these details were removed, they would need to be incorporated in separate pages, and given there is little information to go on on the existence of these channels it would likely mean there would be dozens of stub articles which are more a pain than a benefit to Wikipedia.

If you disagree with my opinion we should move this conversation to the pages talk page so that other editors can put in their opinion as how to best address this issue.

Thanks,

Forbesy 777 (talk) 23:16, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm 47.17.194.111. Do you have a problem with my recent edit? What's so bad about referring that those 2 Teen Titans Go! episodes were the last episodes of their respective years? If you have a problem, you shouldn't have undid what I added, and both of us won't be in this situation again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.17.194.111 (talk) 21:55, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Miles from Tomorrowland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Disney Junior (Canada). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_programs_broadcast_by_Cartoon_Network&curid=287673&diff=647943698&oldid=647939067

Does not being mentioned at the upfront mean they're not going to be aired? Even if a previous upfront mentioned it?
If so, then we may have to wait and see what Boomerang may have to offer, and see if those shows end up there. Heck, Boomerang's YouTube posted previews of Inspector Gadget (2015 TV series), so that may be an indication of what's to come. ElectricBurst^{(Electron firings)}_(Zaps) 00:01, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why do we do it by airing order? It only fucks up the order of the episodes, it's like that for regular show too. Signed, Fluffydipper.

The recent history of List of The Daily Show episodes (2015) is ridiculous. I see you've had two previous blocks for edit warring, and you've reported another editor for edit warring, so I know you know what it means. Block length increased to 10 days, and the next one will likely be for a month. You are going to need to learn to use the talk page. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:29, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't edit the "Regular Show" half-hour specials on the articles List of Regular Show episodes, Regular Show (season 3), Regular Show (season 4) and Regular Show (season 6). These specials ount as two episodes for both the series and the season. That is why, since season 3, each season consisted of 40 episodes, not 39 or 37. I hope you understand this. Thanks. -- Aaron27gg (talk) 18:07, 11 March 2015.

Hi there,

I believed that the Season 3 Finale of Littlest Pet Shop, It's a Pet Fest! actually aired on that Saturday. Please note that all Hasbro/Hub Network/Discovery Family Episodes air only on Saturday mornings. Plus the Finales don't usually air outside of Saturdays. Also, I happened to be a fan of the show and kept track of its initial airings since the start of Season 3 and the mid-break hiatus (from August 22 to December 13). The algorithm error may have the new episodes set to Thursday instead of Saturday. The Discovery Family Promo shows: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=az5wiqrTSwc&feature=youtu.be Even though it didn't say March 7, the Saturday label implied that date.

That's all I need to address. Thank you. WingedArtist28 (talk) 02:46, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Boomerang (TV channel) page, your edit caused a redundant parameter error (help). ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The dates on Futon are wrong. I know because I had watched the episodes months before the supposed air dates. Ultimately, you can find the correct air dates on Marvel Wikia, a source which I posted. The dates on Futon are international air dates not original (US) air dates. DocHeuh (talk) 19:21, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the Episode Order because I live in the UK and Ultimate Spider-Man has been airing longer in the UK and in the correct watch Order, For example The Return of the Guardians of the Galaxy episode is episode 13 not episode 1 and every time I update it you delete it including my recent update of episode 16 Ant-Man airing in the UK on April 4th. Proof can be found here: http://www.locatetv.com/tv/ultimate-spider-man/7516102/episode-guide, The same goes for Avengers Assemble and Hulk and Agents of S.M.A.S.H. Wetboy40 (talk) 20:39, 23 March 2015

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

2015 Kids' Choice Awards

added links pointing to Steve Smith, Sheppard, Rixton and Sarah Walker

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2015 Kids' Choice Awards, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Ian Thomas and Maluma. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 1 April 2015 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I have no sock puppet affiliation as seen by my long and varied edit history which is very far from matching them.

Decline reason:

Given the topic overlap between you and the blocked account coupled with the positive CheckUser, I find that hard to believe. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:42, 2 April 2015 (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.

Hi,

In all honesty, after many weeks of editing with you, I did not suspect you to be a sockpuppet, and clearly from Finealt's alternative accounts, you have no similarities in terms of editing. I am astonished by this, because you've helped so much on many articles in where I needed help. I wish there was a way to contest this block, because it is entirely false. I wish I could help, and I deeply feel sorry for you. I hope you get unblocked soon. Callmemirela (talk) 21:00, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Dc: If this is true, it's a real let-down. As Dcbanners you were a valued and respected member of the community. It was nice to see someone working diligently to improve articles and make them stronger with reliable sources for a change, and it is mind boggling to think you could have such a disdain for the Wikipedia community that you'd be involved in two-faced editing like this. I nominated you for editor of the week just a few days ago, so it's odd to consider that this crap on my talk page could have been committed by you. Major bummer, and if it's true, I hope life catches up to you and makes you regret the time you've wasted in your life being destructive. And if it's not true, I hope you find some other constructive outlets, because you do have a gift and a capacity to do good things. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:03, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seconding Cyphoidbomb. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 03:16, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's not true. But I will be off for a few weeks. I will join Wikia and help out the various wikis on that sire. I understand that I've been a big help. Dcbanners (talk) 03:41, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Having a "good" account doesn't excuse creating and abusing numerous "bad" accounts. See WP:HAND. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:11, 3 April 2015 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

This block is entirely false. I am a valued and respected member of Wikipedia. Finealt is not. Look at all the good things I have done in my edit history. The users appreciate me for the help I have done here. However, I will be gone for a few weeks so this can be sorted out.

Decline reason:

Really obvious and unambiguous checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 14:08, 3 April 2015 (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.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Is it possible for me to have a clean start?

Decline reason:

No. As WP:Clean start explains, "Any user who has active bans, blocks or sanctions (including, but not limited to those listed here); or is being or about to be formally discussed for their conduct; or is attempting to evade scrutiny, may not have a clean start." Huon (talk) 14:24, 3 April 2015 (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.

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).

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

---

Request reason:

Request to vanish. I would like to vanish from Wikipedia. Remove all association of me.

Decline reason:

That wouldn't be a reason to unblock your account. Also, user talk pages are not deleted for this purpose. I'll revdel the personal information in the history of your user page, though. Huon (talk) 18:33, 3 April 2015 (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.

Thought vanishing is when you're in good standing and typically doesn't apply to talk pages. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 17:42, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

From WP:VANISH: Vanishing is not a way to avoid criticism, sanctions, or other negative attention, unless you really mean to leave permanently. As such, it might not be extended to users who have been disruptive, who leave when they lose the trust of the community, or when they are blocked or banned. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:18, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) The standard offer would be available to the user, but that would require a six month disappearance with no sockpuppetry or vandalism. And frankly, I think he owes it to the community to divulge all of the accounts he's used and explain in detail why he has been doing this crap for so long, and what exactly his beef is with Wikipedia. "Just for the lulz" ain't gonna suffice because he's been significantly disruptive as Finealt and he's wasted countless hours of our volunteered time. And since I consider sockpuppet vandalism to be one of the more chickenshit and intellectually lazy activities known to man, the idea that the user could return in six months with no satisfactory explanation and only a promise not to do it again, would be chickenshit upon chickenshit. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:27, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]