I'm MetalDiablo666 and this is my talk page! Please leave a message!

Hi,

I'm wondering whether you actually read what you edit/restore. I removed a phrase from the Cult of Luna page that was repeated/copied three times and you restored back to the erroneous original state.

This is the message i received from you: "Hello, I'm MetalDiablo666. I noticed that you recently removed content from Cult of Luna without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. MetalDiablo666 (talk) 14:31, 3 May 2021 (UTC)"

Now it reads like this:

"Loudwire named it one of the 50 best metal albums of 2019.[18] Loudwire named it one of the 50 best metal albums of 2019.[18] Loudwire named it one of the 50 best metal albums of 2019.[18]"

Does this sound ok to you?

Hi!

we noticed your insistence at using the phrase, will release, when the event hasn't yet occurred. The rest of the article is a mess, and needs to have numerous unsourced and wild claims removed.

thanks for your help in keeping at bay these articles listing marginal accomplishments by non-notable "musicians". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.113.233.249 (talk) 03:45, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So after doing more research, it turns out that Riley Gale was 34 which was confirmed by his UK representative to The Guardian. In addition, Decibel Magazine who originally reported Gale's death age as 35 has corrected it to 34. I added the Guardian source just to clarify.ULTRA-DARKNESS^{:) 2 CHAT} 17:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@User:UltraDark That's fine. Thanks for your clarification. MetalDiablo666 (talk) 17:56, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lamb of God (band), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mark Morton.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Overkill (band), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Savage Messiah.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:13, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:34, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you explain how you feel "2020" alone suggests AC/DC have broken up? There's nothing in that section which even begins to imply that. Nor is there a single word about anything after 2020. In 2021, you can say "2020–present", but not till then. It's like saying today (Tuesday): "We're gonna be doing this thing from Tuesday till today." It's rubbish. If you said it out loud people would laugh at you. If you want to hammer home that they haven't broken up, say something in the text. Not that the band have confirmed anything happening next year anyway. We also have to be careful of WP:CRYSTAL, and suggesting the band will definitely be active next year undeniably violates that. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:06, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you left it at "2020–" then at least that would make sense as a compromise. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:12, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, when you add artists to articles such as 2021 in heavy metal music, can you just add what artist you added in the "Edit summary", please? It lets myself and other editors know quicker what bands have been added without having to click each of your previous edits. Thanks. TheSickBehemoth (talk) 12:24, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Second request: can you just note in your edit summary which aritsts you are adding to 2021 in heavy metal music and similar articles? Thank you. TheSickBehemoth (talk) 00:13, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I saw that you took off the Frozen Crown album that I added to the 2021 in heavy metal music (which I saw your reason as to why which is fine). I was just asking is it fine if my “citation” is a link to a post on their instagram, where in the comments they confirm that it will be released in 2021? Thanks! Elitoole11 (talk) 21:38, 1 January 2021 (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. Thank you. UW Dawgs (talk) 02:12, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:MetalDiablo666. You've been warned for edit warring on The Cult per a complaint at the edit warring noticeboard. You may be blocked if you revert the article again without getting a prior consensus in your favor on the article talk page. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 21:18, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And now at Venom (band). Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:46, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly how were my changes over on the Venom article an "edit war"? MetalDiablo666 (talk) 22:51, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First you accuse me of edit warring and now you reverted my edit after I left a message. Very rude. MetalDiablo666 (talk) 22:56, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I already removed this once from here. Did you read my edit notice? It's above the edit form here. It requests that you should be responding on your talk page if it's about something left on your talk page. You can use the {{ping}} template, or several others, to make sure I see it.

As for the actual edit war, WP:BRD is your guideline. You made the changes without comment. I reverted and stated that "Lists not yet required" as per the documentation that states they are only required if there are more than three items. That was your chance to discuss. You elected not to and instead started an edit war. In short, the documentation is clear that it's not needed, and it is not, so there is no need to add it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:00, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited D. D. Verni, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Feel the Fire.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:13, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Blood in the Water (album) 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/Blood in the Water (album) 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.

Noah ^💬 17:22, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello MetalDiablo666, you recently made some minor edits on the Green Jellÿ page. I reverted them because you merely reworded a few passages, but your motive wasn't clear. You also added one supposed former member, without providing a reference. If you can demonstrate how your edits have improved the article, then I have no objection to them. I would also like to point out that the type of profane language that you intimated in your edit summary, using an abbreviation, is not the kind of tone that is appropriate to Wikipedia. This is a collaborative project, and though you may disagree with what other editors do or how they react to your edits, you may not act in an abusive or rude manner. I am more than happy to discuss your edits with you, but only if you agree to communicate in a civil manner. Thank you. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 01:31, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just want to inform you that uh no; technical death and progressive death are indeed 2 different things. this is probably the best example I can offer to diffentiate the two.

• Decapitated, Cryptopsy, Origin, Spawn of Possession and Archspire is tech death
• Opeth, Black Crown Initiate, Edge of Sanity and Bedsore [ect.] is progressive death metal

And with that said, there’s never been a person (at least who I’ve witnessed) that has EVER called Opeth tech death. The two genres are not synonymous. Second Skin (talk) 21:22, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you actually somehow think this and this are the "same thing"... then I honestly dont know what else to say to you Second Skin (talk) 21:37, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You should spend a little time reading Talk:Motörhead#Classification_of_On_Parole,_again and contributing to it if you wish.217.42.5.238 (talk) 20:45, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Motörhead, Template:Motörhead, and Motörhead discography) 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 read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:11, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Please also do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:13, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Motörhead, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Sorry for the template, but it should be clear to you that further disruption to assert your POV is not appreciated. Please just let it be. — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 04:08, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry you felt my edit that I worked on was not "constructive." I was just trying to make the tone more encyclopedic rather than essayist. If that is not something that appeals I'm sorry. I worked hard on my edits and it hurts me to have have the edit police revert my work. I try to do the best I can and will continue.

really hurtful that you still are doing this to me. I am improving the article and you are reversing that improvement. guess I shouldn't bother. you must really be a hateful individual.

Did you read WP:RED? You're going against policy by removing redlinks. Please stop reverting my changes because of your own private whims.—Chowbok ☠ 10:09, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —Chowbok ☠ 14:55, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Chowbok And I replied. Thanks for the warning. lol MetalDiablo666 (talk) 15:44, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Great White, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mark Kendall.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Deep Purple - Infinite.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair 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) 20:20, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Dead Horse has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 23:33, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:39, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, in my opinion its not "too much information" in the beginning of the article of Scorpions, check for example this one for Led Zeppelin or many of the others articles for music bands. --Stolz (talk) 08:49, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @MetalDiablo666:, I just saw your edits on Burke Shelley. Just a heads up for the future – please be aware that memesrandom is a bot site, not edited by humans, but rather it just scrapes trending info from social media to create stories and generate clicks. These type of websites are a clear violation of WP:RS and must never be used as sources. Thanks --Jkaharper (talk) 02:32, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Horns Up (radio) 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/Horns Up (radio) 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.

Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:32, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please don't create (in this case, recreate) articles with unsourced genres and only one source, which was a press release. I'm not denying that Jethro Tull's albums are generally notable affairs, but you should be aware by this point that news sources independent of the subject are required to establish notability for topics on Wikipedia. If you aren't, please famiiarise yourself with WP:NALBUMS and provide more and better sources than a link to the band's website. If there are no sources for the genres, simply leave them out. Thank you. Ss112 12:15, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:KLOS Horns Up.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair 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) 03:39, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why you even questioned this or seem outraged on Rock Believer. The sentence said "This will be..." I reworded it to present tense after it had been released. It wasn't about whether or not it said "this" versus "it". Maybe in future bear this in mind so you don't have to preface your edit summaries with "WHAT THE HELL" like it's such an outrage somebody changed a couple of words. Ss112 03:20, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: I actually meant WTH as in "Why the heck?". Sorry for the confusion. MetalDiablo666 (talk) 15:58, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! My husband Greg Tribbett was asking me to help edit his page but I have no idea how. Can you help me? Thanks, Debbie Tribbett 99.99.189.61 (talk) 04:03, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HELL TO THE F*CKING YEAH DUDE THATS AWESOME RIP DIME Richandpopulardude (talk) 23:31, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently so. It's all over the news! MetalDiablo666 (talk) 23:33, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Slayer for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 15:24, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Anthrax (American band), without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Stop adding unsupported bands to the list of influences. Binksternet (talk) 21:55, 27 July 2022 (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).

MetalDiablo666 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I don't know why I was blocked, but User:Mr. Punk Pirate is not me. There must be some mistake because I have been editing Wikipedia for nine years and I've never made any disruptive edits.

Decline reason:

 Confirmed sockpuppetry. This is as straight-forward a case as I've ever seen. Yamla (talk) 11:00, 7 August 2022 (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).

MetalDiablo666 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

My unblock request was denied. The reason I'm requesting an unblock is because not only am I NOT a sockpuppet of anybody, but this block is definitely an error. Over the years I've edited Wikipedia, I've hardly ever made any "disruptive" editing, check my contributions for example. MetalDiablo666 (talk) 13:04, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Checkuser verified abuser of multiple accounts. Concur with Yamla; this is entirely unambiguous. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 13:56, 7 August 2022 (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).

MetalDiablo666 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

This is the third time (and probably last time) I will request an unblock. User:NinjaRobotPirate permanently blocked me a month-and-a-half ago and also blocked my IP address to a year from the day I was blocked, claiming I was a sockpuppet of a user named User:Mr. Punk Pirate, and I say this was an error, because Mr. Punk Pirate and me are not the same person, nor am I an abuser of multiple accounts. Believe me, I'd been very careful with my edits and hardly made any abusive or disruptive edits over the years I edited here. Also take a look at my contributions, that should be more than enough proof that I'm a very polite and very civil person rather than a troll, a sockpuppet or whatever. So please unblock me, thank you. MetalDiablo666 (talk) 21:20, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your editing the same set of articles, from the same single-allocation address with the same user agent. The standard offer is available to you, but you will need to own up to the multiple accounts. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:33, 16 September 2022 (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.

@User:Ponyo, "own up to the multiple accounts"? What does that mean? MetalDiablo666 (talk) 21:41, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]