|
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page
Jessica Szohr has been reverted.
Your edit
here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our
external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s):
http://twitter.com/thejessicaszohr (matching the
regex rule \btwitter\.com\b). If the external link you inserted or changed was to a
blog,
forum,
free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's
copyright (see
Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised,
reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see
conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an
external link that does comply with our
policies and
guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's
external links guideline for more information, and consult my
list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see
my FAQ page. Thanks! --
XLinkBot (
talk)
03:31, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jessica Szohr. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. It's a particularly bad idea to edit war with an automated Wikipedia system, a "bot," without raising issues on the relevant article's talk page. Such "bots" generally edit in accordance with a strong Wikipedia consensus Hullaballoo Wolfowitz ( talk) 02:40, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you insert a spam link, as you did to Jessica Szohr, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 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. RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 03:20, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Celiesia Trotman, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Celiesia Trotman. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 20:10, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Celiesia Trotman. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Fre h ley 20:33, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Please
do not add hoaxes to Wikipedia, such as you did in the article
Celiesia Trotman. Hoaxes are caught and marked for deletion shortly after they are created. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method is to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia – and then to correct them if possible. Please
don't disrupt Wikipedia in an attempt to test our ability to detect and remove such material. Feel free to take a look at the
five pillars of Wikipedia policy to learn more about this project and how you can make a positive impact. Thank you.
Wildhartlivie (
talk)
20:36, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Celiesia Trotman. Our verifiability policy requires that all content be cited to a reliable source. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! -- LaraBot ( talk) 00:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Celiesia Trotman. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. — C.Fred ( talk) 02:20, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Celiesia Trotman, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that they
userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.
99.149.84.135 (
talk)
02:26, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you create an inappropriate page, you will be
blocked from editing.
99.149.84.135 (
talk)
02:26, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first. —
C.Fred (
talk)
02:36, 21 November 2009 (UTC)The article Danielle Campbell has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all 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 {{
dated prod}}
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 {{
dated prod}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Ironholds (
talk)
04:12, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Danielle Campbell, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Danielle Campbell. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Glenfarclas ( talk) 04:29, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Gurls wurld, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://www.agurlswurld.com/about/, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:
It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Gurls wurld saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! VernoWhitney ( talk) 16:25, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
|
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page
Jessica Szohr has been reverted.
Your edit
here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our
external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s):
http://twitter.com/thejessicaszohr (matching the
regex rule \btwitter\.com\b). If the external link you inserted or changed was to a
blog,
forum,
free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's
copyright (see
Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised,
reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see
conflict of interest).
If you were trying to insert an
external link that does comply with our
policies and
guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's
external links guideline for more information, and consult my
list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see
my FAQ page. Thanks! --
XLinkBot (
talk)
03:31, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jessica Szohr. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. It's a particularly bad idea to edit war with an automated Wikipedia system, a "bot," without raising issues on the relevant article's talk page. Such "bots" generally edit in accordance with a strong Wikipedia consensus Hullaballoo Wolfowitz ( talk) 02:40, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you insert a spam link, as you did to Jessica Szohr, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 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. RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 03:20, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Celiesia Trotman, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Celiesia Trotman. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 20:10, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Celiesia Trotman. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Fre h ley 20:33, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Please
do not add hoaxes to Wikipedia, such as you did in the article
Celiesia Trotman. Hoaxes are caught and marked for deletion shortly after they are created. If you are interested in how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method is to try to find inaccurate statements that are already in Wikipedia – and then to correct them if possible. Please
don't disrupt Wikipedia in an attempt to test our ability to detect and remove such material. Feel free to take a look at the
five pillars of Wikipedia policy to learn more about this project and how you can make a positive impact. Thank you.
Wildhartlivie (
talk)
20:36, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Celiesia Trotman. Our verifiability policy requires that all content be cited to a reliable source. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! -- LaraBot ( talk) 00:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Celiesia Trotman. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. — C.Fred ( talk) 02:20, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Celiesia Trotman, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that they
userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.
99.149.84.135 (
talk)
02:26, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you create an inappropriate page, you will be
blocked from editing.
99.149.84.135 (
talk)
02:26, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first. —
C.Fred (
talk)
02:36, 21 November 2009 (UTC)The article Danielle Campbell has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all 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 {{
dated prod}}
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 {{
dated prod}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Ironholds (
talk)
04:12, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Danielle Campbell, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Danielle Campbell. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Glenfarclas ( talk) 04:29, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Gurls wurld, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://www.agurlswurld.com/about/, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:
It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Gurls wurld saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! VernoWhitney ( talk) 16:25, 24 June 2010 (UTC)