This user may have left Wikipedia. Xb2u7Zjzc32 has not edited Wikipedia since September 2017. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

• Disambiguation link notifications

The Signpost 2024-12-12 Volume 20, Issue 17 News and notes: Arbitrator election concludes Arbitration report: Palestine-Israel articles 5 Disinformation report: Sex, power, and money revisited Op-ed: On the backrooms by Tamzin In focus: Are Wikipedia articles representative of Western or world knowledge? In the media: Like the BBC, often useful but not impartial Traffic report: Something Wicked for almost everybody Opinion: Worm That Turned's reconfirmation RfA debriefing About · Subscribe · Newsroom

Welcome!

Hello, Xb2u7Zjzc32, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Cadbury Castle, Somerset. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! — Rod ^talk 08:14, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi; you left a message on my User page concerning the above articles. As I have never edited either of the articles, and know nothing about the subject, I think you may have sent this message to the wrong user.Anaxial (talk) 07:59, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need for the complete listing of each program on this page. There is a link to the main page that has the identical list already in the article, this is just redundant and unnecessary. Please do not revert this again, it's a waste of time and could arguably perceived as spam. Thank you. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:19, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moneymaker? I don't have a moneymaker on Wikipedia and there's nothing to accessed on or from a Wikipedia article that does that. However, there are specific policies regarding what can and cannot be direct linked on Wikipedia pages and links that directly trigger a download or require other applications to access may not be directly linked. The links you've tried posting to Bob Hope fall under that policy. A link to a page that lists files is acceptable if those files are directly relevant to an article's subject, but not the file itself. Wildhartlivie (talk) 10:02, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, don't repost the response I make here onto my talk page, if I felt the need to post a response there, I would do so. Secondly, the link that is already on Bob Hope is http://www.freeotrshows.com/otr/b/Bob_Hope_Show.html, although it isn't "my website", it is the website that was added by someone else at some point in time. You are well aware of that since you posted direct links to the files that are also located on that site. Thirdly, I'm not sure that I appreciate the confrontational tone in your posts to my page, please be civil. Finally, the policy regarding external links is at WP:EL and the list that specifically cites media rich links is at WP:ELNO. The link to the archive page is already there, the individual files do not need to be listed as well, especially when it triggers a download when clicked directly from the Wikipedia page. Wildhartlivie (talk) 11:00, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit, we do not link via imbedded external links like this. We especially do not link to user comments on IMDB. They are opinions submitted by users and are in no way considered anything other than someone's personal opinion, which has no place in an encyclopedia article. Please do not imbed external links into articles in this way anymore. Thank you. Wildhartlivie (talk) 10:17, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Xb2u7Zjzc32, take note of the above message. Thank you. E. Báthory _talk/contr. 02:11, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you make disruptive edits to Wikipedia contrary to the Manual of Style, as you did at Cuban missile crisis, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. — raekyt 22:56, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• • Unacceptable linking behavior, according to WP:EL we DO NOT use external links within the body of an article. You've been having this issue for years apparently and have done nothing to change this behavior. Recent survey of your edits turned up the following edits. I chose to do an immediate final warning since this behavior has persisted so long. Take heed of this warning, since next action against your account may be a temporary ban. — raekyt 23:16, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • 22:45, 21 October 2012
    • 19:43, 11 October 2012
    • 22:25, 13 October 2012
    • 21:17, 13 October 2012

Thank you for your edit to Harlem Shake (song). Unfortunately, the material you added is already present in the article Harlem Shake (meme), where information dealing with a video description seems relevant. If you have any questions about the content's removal, feel free to ask me at my talk page. Thank you. Dan56 (talk) 03:49, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube should not be used as a source, as it involves self-published material. The artist posting the song on YouTube is not an official release, and the song's earliest appearance is discussed in the article's background section already. This addition disrupted the flow of the section's prose and introduced an anachronistic overview of YouTube post, meme going viral, and something about the dance in the video not being the actual Harlem Shake dance, which is explained at Harlem Shake (meme). The "commercial performance" section covers the idea that "The 30-second video featured people dancing to the song" and makes no allusion to the Harlem Shake dance. The meme going viral is also covered in that section's first paragraph. The only connection of the dance to this song is the vocal that is sampled, which is discussed in the "music and lyrics" section. Dan56 (talk) 04:45, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Lester Foster. I wanted to let you know that I removed an external link you added to the page Harlem Shake (song), because it seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. Lester Foster (talk | talk) 08:22, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Harlem Shake (song). Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Dan56 (talk) 03:35, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Better Living Through Circuitry may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• scene - Joel T Jordan; Jason A Jordan; Earth Program Ltd.; Summer Forest Hoeckel|oclc=42726291}}]</ref><ref>[http://www.gfsproductions.com/info/thanks.html (Nick, Joel, Jason, Rob, Guav, Andrew,

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:25, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Airship hangar may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• at [[Bartolomeu de Gusmão Airport]], [[Santa Cruz, Rio de Janeiro|Santa Cruz]], [[Rio de Janeiro]]), [[Brazil]], the only hangar of all those built which still exists (see [[:pt:Hangar do Zeppelin|''

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:38, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Diamond Head, Hawaii may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• of the Hawaiian Islands; because of this, Diamond Head is widely used for commercial purposes (see [[Diamond Head|Diamond Head (disambiguation)]]. Many souvenirs from Hawaii and surf shop logos

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:32, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Japanese American internment may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Several U.S. Army internment camps held Japanese, [[Italian-American internment|Italian]] and [[German-American internment|German American] men considered "potentially dangerous." Camp Lordsburg,

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:13, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• As an external link: * Sometimes. Videos from "official channels", like the United States' Naval History & Heritage Command, are more likely to be accepted than other links.
• As a reliable source: * Sometimes. If the source would normally be considered reliable (e.g., a segment from a well-known television news show, or an official video channel from a major publisher), then a copy of the source on YouTube is still considered reliable.
• Common issues:

1. Videos must be carefully screened for copyright violations (WP:ELNEVER, WP:COPYLINK, WP:YT). The creator of the video must be verifiable as an official channel for the source. Do not link to copyright violations in citations, even if they reproduce information, such as news reports, that might otherwise be considered reliable.
2. Many readers (especially users on restricted or metered bandwidth, or those behind restrictive corporate or educational firewalls) are unable to view video.
3. Videos often contain less information than alternative websites or the Wikipedia article itself (ELNO #1).
4. Videos must be labeled with software requirements (Rich media).
5. Editors enforce a particularly high standard for links to videos.

• General comment: Because the Commons and Metawiki have a 100MB limit on files some files are added to YouTube for use in Wikipedia that are gathered from United States government sources such as the National Archives by WikiProject FedFlix or other projects. These files can be used on Wikipedia articles if available.

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to John Leguizamo. See Wikipedia:External_links/Perennial_websites#IMDb - IMDb is NOT an acceptable source for Wiki. If you still want to push the issue take to WP:RSN, or better yet search the archives for the copious discussions about this. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:28, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You well-know by now that IMDb is not an acceptable source for bio info in Wiki - stop it. Find a reliable source. The only reliable reference that can be used is the credits for Ice Age: Continental Drift and Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs had an actor named Lucas Leguizamo in those films. The film itself is a reliable primary source of its own credits. IMDb editors just transcribe credits into articles and may or may not do so reliably. Any link of Lucas Leguizamo being another name for Ryder Lee Leguizamo requires a reference that is NOT IMDb. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:20, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to your statement that my revert was not justified as it was "bot, not a Good reason for deletion [sic]", please be aware that CC is a featured article and that anything being added needs to be in keeping with the rest of the article in terms of quality. I had no problem with the source, but it was the formatting which left a lot to be desired. Dodgy edits, such as yours, will always be challanged no matter what as it is imperative that we keep CC in great condition. Thanks. Cassianto^talk 10:06, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on S.M.A.R.T.. 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.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
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; 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. Aoidh (talk) 20:34, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. However, please remember that editors do not own articles and should respect the work of their fellow contributors on Ukraine Is Not a Brothel. If you create or edit an article, remember that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:21, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When adding links to material on external sites, as you did to Landmark Worldwide, please ensure that the external site is not violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you believe the linked site is not violating copyright with respect to the material, then you should do one of the following:

• If the linked site is the copyright holder, leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page;
• If a note on the linked site credibly claims permission to host the material, or a note on the copyright holder's site grants such permission, leave a note on the article Talk page with a link to where we can find that note;
• If you are the copyright holder or the external site administrator, adjust the linked site to indicate permission as above and leave a note on the article Talk page;

If the material is available on a different site that satisfies one of the above conditions, link to that site instead. Bbb23 (talk) 05:43, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Landmark Worldwide 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. Bbb23 (talk) 00:13, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Manjaro Linux 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. - Ahunt (talk) 21:12, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

We do not link to Twitter or other social media when the subject has an official web site. Those links should be on the subject's website, and if they are not it is because the subject does not want to advertise them to the public. Please see WP:ELPEREN. Please do not keep re-adding the Twitter link to Steve Gibson (computer programmer). Thank you. Skyerise (talk) 18:27, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if an external link is used as a reference, then it does not also get listed under external links. Thanks. Skyerise (talk) 18:35, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Xb2u7Zjzc32. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Steve Gibson (computer programmer), you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
• Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Skyerise (talk) 22:29, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not allow searches of any site to be used as citations. Citations must be to independent, third-party sources that explicitly state the fact being represented in the article. We do not allow original research, and web and site searches are exactly that, research. Skyerise (talk) 23:22, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please review WP:USERTALK. It is considered harassment to repeatedly restore a message on another user's talk page. I read your message, it was not deserving of a response. I removed it. Please do not restore it again. Thanks. Skyerise (talk) 22:23, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Skyerise (talk) 16:25, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am wondering where you got the information that all those "celebrities" have lived in Benedict Canyon. I haven't checked, but are they are all referenced to Reliable souirces? Questioningly, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 02:44, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you requested full protection [1] and used a news source with the request and said there was "*vandalism by editors, removing signatures". I don't understand. There were no signatures removed from the talk page and I'm about the only one who has edited the page. I am unclear what you are stating.--Mark Miller (talk) 00:59, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, and thank you for your attempt to lighten up Wikipedia. However, this is an encyclopedia and the articles are intended to be serious, so please don't make joke edits. Readers looking for accurate information will not find them amusing. If you'd like to experiment with editing, please use the sandbox instead, where you are given a good deal of freedom in what you write. Alex2006 (talk) 13:41, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Capicola. Alex2006 (talk) 14:29, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you don't understand the real meaning of Italian words, but you added twice a blasphemy on the talk page. Next time you will be reported. Alex2006 (talk) 14:31, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and you have been just reported because of that. Alex2006 (talk) 14:37, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of FBReader, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.wikipediatldr.com/wiki/FBReader.

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. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 01:27, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on FBReader requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.wikipediatldr.com/articles/803568/fbreader. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. reddogsix (talk) 01:37, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Reddogsix :

"material copied directly from http://www.wikipediatldr.com/wiki/FBReader"

wikipediatldr.com is material copied directly from wikipedia.org.! FIX CorenSearchBot.!~~ Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk)

Yes, I know. That is why I removed the CSD from the page. You beat me to removing the tag from your page. reddogsix (talk) 01:54, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

"Warning: Duplication Detector may in some cases give no results or incomplete results. This does not necessarily indicate copying has not occurred. Manually examine the source document to verify."~~ Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk)

~~ Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk)

Hello, Xb2u7Zjzc32. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

HazelAB (talk) 12:30, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article FBReader 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/FBReader until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Shii (tock) 09:04, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Xb2u7Zjzc32. The copyright problem at FBReader was created, not by copying from the external site, but by cutting & pasting material from one page to another on Wikipedia. The bot often helps detect such problems.

Content on Wikipedia is not public domain, but is licensed liberally for use and modification if the terms of the license are met. One of the terms of the license is that content must be attributed - we must maintain a list of contributors connected to the content itself. When you cut & paste content from one page to another, you do not comply with the license and the resultant content becomes a copyright infringement.

I have fixed this by putting the history of the article back with the material you placed in article space. If you have moved content by cutting and pasting in the past, please request a history merge so that the copyright concerns can be resolved.

If in the future you wish to give a page a new name or relocate it, please move it instead of copying & pasting it.

As an additional note, if you just wish to duplicate content between pages - for instance, if a paragraph is more appropriate in another article or is appropriate in both - you handle attribution differently, although attribution is still required. The process is explained at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:00, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is copying. You didn't actually undelete it, because you cannot undelete it. Only administrators can do that. Any time you move content from one page to another that was edited by somebody other than you, that's undeleting.

However, you didn't actually have to undelete the content; it was not deleted at the time you created the new space. It was in Wikipedia:Draft space. What should be done in such cases is a page move. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:28, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Automat. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. hulmem (talk) 15:26, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Newspaper reference to an Automat like FEBO~~ Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 16:41, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is not really a news story; it is a review-like feature story intended to publicize the restaurant. In addition, the story does not use the terms "automat" or "FEBO". --hulmem (talk) 19:24, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please let me know if you plan to take up your Newspapers.com account, which was approved in July 2015. If I don't hear from you by October 15 I will assume you are no longer interested and the account will be given to another user. Thanks HazelAB (talk) 12:40, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Newspapers.com account registered. ~ ~~ Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk)

Err how does that affect me? GiantSnowman 19:58, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@GiantSnowman: You deleted previous Nuclear RAT page.Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk)

Your ping didn't work because you didn't sign and date your post. I have restored the article history, in future all you need to do is ask... GiantSnowman 07:18, 18 October 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 Donald Trump page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:27, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{{Reflist}} syntax errorXb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 13:38, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I saw your change to New York Singing Teachers' Association, adding links from the author's first name and last name to Gerald Nachman (journalist). Rather than code it as:

*{{cite book|ref=harv |last=[[Gerald Nachman (journalist)|Nachman]]|first=[[Gerald Nachman (journalist)|Gerald]] |title=Raised on Radio |year=2000}}

a neater way is to code it as:

*{{cite book|ref=harv |last=Nachman|first=Gerald |authorlink=Gerald Nachman (journalist) |title=Raised on Radio |year=2000}}

You can add ... |authorlink=author name ... with any of the citation templates (no square brackets needed).

With citations that do not use templates, you can link the whole name, so instead of:

<ref>[[Gerald Nachman (journalist)|Nachman]], [[Gerald Nachman (journalist)|Gerald]]. ''Raised on Radio'' (Pantheon Books 1998), p. 186.</ref>

you can code:

<ref>[[Gerald Nachman (journalist)|Nachman, Gerald]]. ''Raised on Radio'' (Pantheon Books 1998), p. 186.</ref>

Either way, the result is minutely better because when the reader hovers the mouse over the name they do not get a gap between the first and last names.

• Before: Nachman, Gerald
• After: Nachman, Gerald

Hope this helps, Aymatth2 (talk) 12:04, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

any easy (automated) way to fix them ? Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 13:36, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I came here after examining Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#Should an author's name be linked inside a citation? Another issue is that some templates produce metadata like Template:Cite book#COinS. Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser can help with systematic changes like this. I can set up an AWB run later today. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:13, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed the remaining cases. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:51, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1985/jan/01
• http://articles.latimes.com/1980/jan/01

Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk)

• http://articles.philly.com/1986/jan/01
• http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1985/jan/01
• http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1985/jan/01
• http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2001/jan/01
• http://articles.chicagobreakingnews.com/2007/jan/01
• http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1985/jan/01
• http://articles.courant.com/1991/jan/01
• http://articles.hbindependent.com/1999/jan/01
• http://articles.glendalenewspress.com/1999/nov/29
• http://articles.petoskeynews.com/2000/dec/28
• http://articles.redeyechicago.com/2011/oct/30
• http://articles.mcall.com/1985/jan/02
• http://articles.southbendtribune.com/2005/nov/11
• http://articles.dailypilot.com/1999/aug/23
• http://articles.dailypress.com/1989/jan/01
• http://articles.burbankleader.com/1999/nov/20
• http://articles.ivpressonline.com/2001/jan/05
• http://articles.centralkynews.com/2003/aug/01
• http://articles.lacanadaonline.com/2004/mar/06
• http://articles.ktuu.com/2008/oct/05
• http://articles.dailypilot.com/2000/jan/01
• http://articles.wdbj7.com/2007/jan/07
• http://articles.herald-mail.com/1996/nov/13
• http://articles.ky3.com/2007/jan/30
• http://articles.wsbt.com/2011/jun/10
• http://articles.dailyamerican.com/2003/apr/01
• http://articles.coastlinepilot.com/2015/oct/30 ?
• http://articles.aberdeennews.com/2015/oct/30
• http://articles.kspr.com/2015/oct/30

Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk)

If you want to, take a look at the article about Marie Serneholt which is this weeks TAFI article. Regards.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:41, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you find time for it, please take a look at the article about Oba Chandler. It is a article that I have edited a lot over the years. So any improvements etc are welcomed. Regards,--BabbaQ (talk) 09:31, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 16:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Association For the Protection Of Internet Copyright requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.a-w.org/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. —Largo Plazo (talk) 17:49, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Thanks for editing Wikipedia! I don't really understand why you are changing the references on the Lada St. Edmund article. I cleaned up the reference that was broken (the Neilsen) however, using Facebook and Photobucket as references doesn't fly on Wikipedia - they are unreliable sources. We have to use reliable secondary sources which the article uses. Feel free to review that here: WP:RELIABLE. Thanks again for editing Wikipedia. Missvain (talk) 18:07, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:YU Televentures, you may be blocked from editing. Rohini (talk) 19:01, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Xb2u7Zjzc32. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by — Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:53, 3 February 2016 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Greetings. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Asturians, did not appear to be constructive and has been or will be reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, 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 some test edits, please use the 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. Thank you. Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:13, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

You are receiving this message because The Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to Questia. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:

• Make sure that you can still log in to your Questia account; if you are having trouble feel free to get in touch.
• When your account expires you can reapply for access at WP:Questia.
• Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed.
• Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, email us and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.

Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services The Wikipedia Library can offer.

Thanks! 20:25, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Dear Sir/Madam!

Could You please take a look at the discussion on the Talk Page of the 2016 Munich Shooting Thomas Salbey Section? I would like to know Your opinion, whether he should be included in the article or not.--Ltbuni (talk) 13:07, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Elite Squad, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page City of God. 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) 09:46, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I actually do understand Wikipedia biographies, having worked on them for many years. I've also read what you've written so far for this man; this is not a biographical article, but a squealy fan page. For that matter, perhaps I'm just missing it, but what reliable source gives his name as "Michael Tucker"? I'm seeing several saying it is Michael Diamond; for example, [2] [3] [4] [5] [6], etc. Regardless, have your fun, I'm removing all music articles from my watchlist; they've simply grown too toxic. — Huntster (t @ c) 02:26, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it is a well researched stub. Unfortunately, some of these sources have sloppy errors, needing corroborating references. You may need to read all the sources to gain an understanding of his biography. I hope you see the NPOV. THERE IS NO "squealy".

Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 02:38, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Claymore, Gabriela Tully. "Interview Q&A: BloodPop (FKA Blood Diamonds) On The Indie/Pop Divide & Working With Grimes, Justin Bieber, & Madonna". November 24, 2015. Stereogum
• Stereogum is part of SpinMedia

Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 02:59, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you make article "That's my girl (fifth harmony single)"? https://teknopedia.ac.id/wiki/Wikipedia:Requested_articles/music/Songs#T

And make single "That's my Girl" from album 7/27 linked? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7/27

You can open http://headlineplanet.com/home/2016/08/25/thats-girl-set-fifth-harmonys-next-single-detroits-98-7-amp-gets-board/ and http://www.josepvinaixa.com/blog/fifth-harmony-thats-my-girl/ as resource — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kim Dong Kyu (talk • contribs) 11:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• read other articles about other singles
• start a page in a sandbox
  • https://teknopedia.ac.id/wiki/User:Kim_Dong_Kyu/That's_my_girl_(fifth_harmony_single)
• build the page
• have the page reviewed
• hello at : https://teknopedia.teknokrat.ac.id/wiki/Pengguna:Kim_Dong_Kyu
• Kim Dong Kyu

Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 01:10, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited BloodPop, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Madonna and Grimes. 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) 10:07, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Which articles do you think are good examples of similar biographies?" - Mako, Martin Garrix, Ookay, etc.

"Remember this is not a good article, just a stub, a start, and you are encouraged to improve it." - Of course I know that. I added the tags to remind other editors who want to improve this article. I would improve it myself, but I've been busy (since adding the tags).

"Please read all referenced articles first. Is English not your first language?" - I don't want to read them because I can figure out how a DJ/Musician article should look like and what's with the sarcasm? English is my first language and I don't need to do what you tell me to because you're not the boss of me. - TheMagnificentist (talk) 10:41, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Which articles do you think are good examples of similar biographies ? Remember this is not a good article, just a stub, a start, and you are encouraged to improve it.
• (this was meant as friendly encouragement)
• Please read all referenced articles first.
• (this is meant as a nota bene)
• (because most of the reference articles are sloppy {with the exception of a couple} and thus, a good wikipedia article for this bioigraphy requires a synthesis of facts, corroborated between articles)
• Is English not your first language ?
• (your page, and your usage of the language, and where you say you live , lead me to conclude that your first language is not english, it was not intended to seem sarcastic.)

Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 10:35, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• • User:Rizhopper has been renamed. The rename log is provided below for reference.
    • 09:33, 16 September 2016 User:K6ka renamed User:Rizhopper (804 edits) to User:TheMagnificentist (Per en:WP:CHUS)
  • User:Rizhopper has been deleted. The deletion and move log for the page are provided below for reference.
    • 23:55, 13 September 2016 User:Kelapstick deleted User:Rizhopper (U1: User request to delete pages in own userspace (CSDH))
  • User talk:Xb2u7Zjzc32 EDITED BY User:Rizhopper=User:TheMagnificentist WITHOUT SIGNING

Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk)

What? - TheMagnificentist (talk) 11:03, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Xb2u7Zjzc32. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

HazelAB (talk) 13:29, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Xb2u7Zjzc32,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Albert Bertil Tolf 1911 - 1996 for deletion, because it's too short to identify the subject of the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Foysol3195 (talk) 13:51, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Xb2u7Zjzc32. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article Chicken Paillard has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

All sources are recipes so it fails WP:NOTE and this also conflicts with WP:NOTRECIPE

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Drewmutt (talk) 01:49, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Kat Dennings. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you.

Quit adding those links to Kat Dennings' page. Details of when she started tweeting or her YouTube activity are not at all pertinent to her page and fall under WP:IINFO and WP:TRIVIA, especially when the sources are not independent. snapsnap ^(talk) 17:46, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Kat Dennings, you may be blocked from editing.

No, the information you're trying to add is not notable at all. Spamming the page with a bunch of social media links is certainly not an improvement. Did you even bother to review Wikipedia policies? Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Using reliable sources over social media is not "misleading". In fact, all information must be verified by third-party sources that are not closely affiliated with the subject, which is not the case with your edits. snapsnap ^(talk) 02:53, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In October, you added a number of references to Computer Networks: The Heralds of Resource Sharing. I have removed most of them, as they were not good sources. Several copied from Wikipedia, others were self-published books, most were in passing mentions. Also, listing a series of references like that (even if they were reliable) without using the references in the article is poor practice. I made use of a couple of your sources i.e. cited facts from those sources, and found some better sources. Fences&Windows 23:29, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the typeface is Peignot [7] Cheers, Bruce Agendum

• Cet utilisateur peut contribuer avec un niveau intermédiaire en français.

This is your only warning; if you insert a spam link to Wikipedia again, as you did at Jessica Chastain, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 11:54, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Jessica Chastain 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 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. 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. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 12:01, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Juan M. Thompson 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/Juan M. Thompson until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. -KAP03(^{Talk • Contributions}) 18:55, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Juan M. Thompson requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. →ὦiki-Coffee^{(talk to me!)} _{(contributions)} 19:23, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Juan M. Thompson requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. →ὦiki-Coffee^{(talk to me!)} _{(contributions)} 15:06, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Omar LOWE - Director (Resigned) BREATHEFRESH LIMITED (10383019)
• User:Wiki-Coffee
• User:Wiki-Pharaoh
• User:Wiki-Pharaoh#Block appeal

Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 10:12, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Keeping Fit and Connected (6635665267) (crop).jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:50, 14 March 2017 (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 The Onion, did not appear constructive and has 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 the 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. Thank you. SpyMagician (talk) 14:27, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Gloria LeRoy

added links pointing to Jack (film), It's a Living, The Blue Knight, Weird Science, Crazy Like a Fox, Kaz and The Clock

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:52, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chicken Paillard 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/Chicken Paillard until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Seraphim System ^(talk) 05:24, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pls do not add bad category. DePiep (talk) 22:30, 4 June 2017 (UTC) DePiep (talk) 22:30, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to MasterChef Australia (series 4). It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. WWGB (talk) 01:23, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to do something constructive, I suggest you write a Ben Milbourne article to include his stints on MasterChef, Ben's Menu and Food Lab. That is preferable to inserting bad links into existing articles. WWGB (talk) 02:06, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Jeremy Corbyn. Mattythewhite (talk) 16:41, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What are you trying to achieve by seemingly randomly adding links to YouTube videos? Mattythewhite (talk) 16:52, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making disruptive edits, as you did at She Wore a Yellow Ribbon. If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Please stop adding completely unnecessary link. The poster in question is already shown on article page. David J Johnson (talk) 19:56, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making test edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Rachel Maddow. It is considered vandalism, which, under Wikipedia policy, can lead to being blocked from editing. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Sundayclose (talk) 00:19, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Theatrical cartels, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. —swpb^T 18:14, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to improve fire alarm call box (with this dynamic IP address) by specifying that VoIP equipment needs external power to run, rather than just "power" period. But that improvement got reverted by a user who doesn't understand telephony enough to know that PSTN lines have their own power that basic phones run on. ("Well, DUH, what did you think the basic phones ran on: magic fairy dust?") So before I added the improvement that he faultily reverted, the article made the errant implication that the only kind of line power comes from mains, hence my having added clarification words such as "external" to "power," to indicate to the people whom my above parenthetical phrase applies to that PSTN lines have their own power, while the article already covers that VoIP and the charging of cell phones takes another source of line power. So let's agree to use my improvement in this regard, rather than regressing the article to a less correct form, shall we?

I left this at the talk page there. Will you please come and try to help out?

Thanks, if so,

97.117.48.89 (talk) 09:10, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Xb2u7Zjzc32. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi -- I'm helping organize an edit-a-thon in a few weeks. Someone suggested that your background work on Eliza A. Pittsinger would be good fodder for someone to incorporate more content in that article. It sounds like a good idea, but I don't want to step on your toes. Would it suit you if someone were to do that? Please let me know what you think. Thanks! -Kenirwin/(talk) 12:55, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]