User talk:RyanXZF: Difference between revisions

Line 1: Line 1:

==I need someone to explain to me==

I needed Deven Mack to have his own article cos he voiced [[Sonic the Hedgehog (character)|Sonic]] in ”[[Sonic Prime]]”. Deven still counts as one of the voices behind one of the most iconic video game characters of all time, and also has multiple other voice acting roles in other animations, so I don’t see a reason for Wikipedians to treat Black Canadian voice actors differently compared to their Caucasian counterparts. So no offence, but isn’t that a bit racist? The nationality for any voice behind the speedy blue hedgehog doesn’t matter, I mean [[Jaleel White]], who voiced Sega’s iconic mascot in the 90s Sonic cartoons, has an article and is also black, but it’s not fair to treat him better than poor Deven. We all like Sonic and he’s everyone’s favourite hedgehog, but you guys have to learn that you can’t always expect him to have a white voice actor all the time. Black voice actors are just as talented as white ones, from [[Phil LaMarr]] to [[Kevin Michael Richardson]], and there’s no limit in what minorities can do! Diversity is very important, especially in the voice-acting industry. Things change. It’s life!

And you guys don’t want Thomas Astruc, the creator of a certain French cartoon about a duo of a bug-themed supergirl and a cat-themed superdude, and [[Miraculous Ladybug|one of the biggest, most popular, cartoons of all time]] to have an article just because he is male. Men are allowed to make girly cartoons as well, (Iginio Straffi, creator of Winx Club has an article) so isn’t it unfair to treat poor Astruc differently compared to other creators of famous cartoons? I know there are a lot of creators behind well-known animations that haven’t got Wikipedia articles yet, like [[Valerie Walsh Valdes]] (co-creator of ”[[Dora the Explorer]]”), [[Eric Robles]], (creator of ”[[Fanboy & Chum Chum]]”), and [[Neville Astley]] (co-creator of ”[[Peppa Pig]]”). It’s okay for men and boys to like fairies, unicorns and even female superbugs; you can’t stereotype them by assuming they only prefer dinosaurs, robots and sci-fi stuff. I know gender stereotyping is hard to be ignored but it’s still wrong. I understand you guys wish ”Ladybug” was created by a woman, but there’s nothing you can do about it and you can’t change it – and you still need to respect Astruc by giving him a page, okay?

So let’s get to the next part of this discussion… STOP TREATING DEVEN MACK AND THOMAS ASTRUC DIFFERENTLY!!!! Just tell me the reason why these two gifted and talented indivduals have no Wikipedia articles? I know this hasn’t got to do with my block, but just tell me the reason and be honest with me.

== September 2025 ==

[[File:Information.svg|left|25px|alt=]] Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to [[:Danger Mouse (2015 TV series)]] have been undone by an automated computer program called [[User:ClueBot NG|ClueBot NG]].

I needed Deven Mack to have his own article cos he voiced Sonic in Sonic Prime. Deven still counts as one of the voices behind one of the most iconic video game characters of all time, and also has multiple other voice acting roles in other animations, so I don't see a reason for Wikipedians to treat Black Canadian voice actors differently compared to their Caucasian counterparts. So no offence, but isn't that a bit racist? The nationality for any voice behind the speedy blue hedgehog doesn't matter, I mean Jaleel White, who voiced Sega's iconic mascot in the 90s Sonic cartoons, has an article and is also black, but it's not fair to treat him better than poor Deven. We all like Sonic and he's everyone's favourite hedgehog, but you guys have to learn that you can't always expect him to have a white voice actor all the time. Black voice actors are just as talented as white ones, from Phil LaMarr to Kevin Michael Richardson, and there's no limit in what minorities can do! Diversity is very important, especially in the voice-acting industry. Things change. It's life!

And you guys don’t want Thomas Astruc, the creator of a certain French cartoon about a duo of a bug-themed supergirl and a cat-themed superdude, and one of the biggest, most popular, cartoons of all time to have an article just because he is male. Men are allowed to make girly cartoons as well, (Iginio Straffi, creator of Winx Club has an article) so isn’t it unfair to treat poor Astruc differently compared to other creators of famous cartoons? I know there are a lot of creators behind well-known animations that haven’t got Wikipedia articles yet, like Valerie Walsh Valdes (co-creator of Dora the Explorer), Eric Robles, (creator of Fanboy & Chum Chum), and Neville Astley (co-creator of Peppa Pig). It’s okay for men and boys to like fairies, unicorns and even female superbugs; you can’t stereotype them by assuming they only prefer dinosaurs, robots and sci-fi stuff. I know gender stereotyping is hard to be ignored but it’s still wrong. I understand you guys wish Ladybug was created by a woman, but there’s nothing you can do about it and you can’t change it – and you still need to respect Astruc by giving him a page, okay?

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Danger Mouse (2015 TV series) have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 19:33, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Taylor Dooley. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article’s talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Frost 09:20, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, then, if you wish to do so, respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Xoof Schmoof. Thank you. Belbury (talk) 09:50, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Rambley was:
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

Rambley 🦝 (talk) 20:37, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, RyanXZF!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we’d love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Rambley 🦝 (talk) 20:37, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This user’s unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

Decline reason:

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.

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

Request reason:

Your reason here I’m not sockpuppeting; I was just trying to fix Wikipedia. I just noticed the differences between the 1981 Squawkencluck and the 2015 Squawkencluck, so I was just being trivial, okay? I wasn’t sockpuppeting! I had to give Astruc an article cos I’m surprised that he had no article despite creating a really popular, iconic and globally successful cartoon series with a very massive fanbase. And I thought Deven Mack, the guy who voiced Sonic in Sonic Prime needed some notable attention too, given that he still counts as one of Sonic’s voice actors and I see no reason to treat Black Canadian voice actors differently than White Canadian voice actors. So I wasn’t vandalising anyway. I need you to be reasonable with me and stop stereotyping me as a sockpuppeteer. You wanna know the truth? I’m not a crony working for Xoof Schmoof cos I’m actually the same person as him. I’m using a new computer with a new username cos my older one got broken. Can’t you let this block expire?

Decline reason:

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

Request reason:

Your reason here: I needed Deven Mack to have his own article cos he voiced Sonic in Sonic Prime. He still counts as one of the voices behind the famous hedgehog, and also has multiple other voice acting roles in other animations, so I don’t see a reason for Wikipedians to treat Black Canadian voice actors differently compared to their Caucasian counterparts. So isn’t that a bit racist? And you guys don’t want Thomas Astruc, the creator of one of the biggest, most popular, French cartoons of all time to have an article just because he is male. Men are allowed to make girly cartoons as well, (Iginio Straffi, creator of Winx Club has an article) so isn’t it unfair to treat poor Astruc differently compared to other creators of famous cartoons? I understand you guys wish Ladybug was created by a woman, but you still need to respect Astruc by giving him a page, okay? STOP TREATING DEVEN MACK AND THOMAS ASTRUC DIFFERENTLY!

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you:
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Cabayi (talk) 11:56, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Request reason:

Your reason here I needed Deven Mack to have his own article cos he voiced Sonic in Sonic Prime. Deven still counts as one of the voices behind one of the most iconic video game characters of all time, and also has multiple other voice acting roles in other animations, so I don’t see a reason for Wikipedians to treat Black Canadian voice actors differently compared to their Caucasian counterparts. So no offence, but isn’t that a bit racist? The nationality for any voice behind the speedy blue hedgehog doesn’t matter, I mean Jaleel White, who voiced Sega’s iconic mascot in the 90s Sonic cartoons, has an article and is also black, but it’s not fair to treat him better than poor Deven. We all like Sonic and he’s everyone’s favourite hedgehog, but you guys have to learn that you can’t always expect him to have a white voice actor all the time. Black voice actors are just as talented as white ones, from Phil LaMarr to Kevin Michael Richardson, and there’s no limit in what minorities can do! Diversity is very important, especially in the voice-acting industry. Things change. It’s life!

Decline reason:

(I have moved this threat to the bottom of the page for better readability.) This is the fourth unblock request in a row in which you do not meaningfully address the reason for your block; that reason being that you appear to have been abusing multiple accounts by evading a previous block. Content issues are not relevant to this, and trying to argue about them in appeals will not help get you unblocked. If you file any additional appeals that do not address the block reason, it is very likely that your ability to edit this page will be revoked. For guidance regarding how to appeal, please see WP:GAB. —Blablubbs (talk) 19:18, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply