Welcome!
Hello, MJD86, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}}
after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Have week a nice week and god bless :) --
James, La gloria è a dio
23:05, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
James, La gloria è a dio has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hey there. I couldn't help noticing you appear to be interested in Seinfeld. I am interested in setting up a Seinfeld WikiProject to improve articles related to Seinfeld. At the moment I am just looking for people who are interested in joining. If you are interested in joining, please add your name here or contact me on my talk page. Thankyou, Joelster 06:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Whats with the edits on Alexander Mahone? Its kinda confusing me. Everyoneandeveryone ( talk) 00:12, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
WTF? I had to make alot of edits 'cuz u fucked up everything and it kept re-verting back again and again. Everyoneandeveryone ( talk) 00:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Your summary at this diff should indicate that, in addition to changing where one of the links point, you are also reintroducing disputed material. Croctotheface ( talk) 03:19, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Also, this and this. In both those cases, you were not actually undoing my edits. Do you somehow want to make it seem that I introduced nonstandard spelling or weird encoded notes? Edit summaries are permanent. If you have some issue with me, don't try to hurt my reputation by doing things like that. Croctotheface ( talk) 10:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Instead of just reverting me, could you please respond to my arguments? Why is the "Cultural References" section not OR? I am willing to concede that making the connection with the other episode is a bit more of a grey area, but the Cultural References section seems pretty clear cut to me.-- Asmodeus Samael ( talk) 18:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Would you be interested in editting at the
Simpsons wiki? It doesn't have any of the limitations that Wikipedia has, so you can add just about anything relating to the show. --
Scorpion
0422
17:59, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
{{
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
If you
vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to
Today, I am a Clown, you will be
blocked from editing. --
Scorpion
0422
05:09, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Today, I am a Clown. Note that the
three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the
three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be
blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a
consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue
dispute resolution.
Rjd0060 (
talk)
05:21, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
It's clear that you have a problem with me. There's nothing I can do or say that will change that. However, your campaign of harassment needs to stop. At some point, I'm going to stop merely removing that stuff from my talk page and eventually pursue some kind of sanctions against you. If you don't like editing here because you can't get your version of this or that page implemented, that's not my business. Don't take it out on me. Croctotheface ( talk) 19:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing at Santa's Little Helper. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. -- Scorpion 0422 04:31, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
— slakr\ talk / 07:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/MJD86 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Scorpion 0422 13:14, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Rudget . 13:32, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello, MJD86. Based on the templates on your talk page, I would like you to consider joining the Article Rescue Squadron. Rescue Squadron members are focused on rescuing articles for deletion, that might otherwise be lost forever. I think you will find our project matches your vision of Wikipedia. Note:Keep in mind that Squadron members officially state they are not inclusionists. ~~~~ |
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)
16:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
The article Fawzia Mohamed has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non-notable beauty queen, didn't win a major title.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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.
Liz
Read!
Talk!
00:58, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
The article Gaukhar Rakhmetaliyeva has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Violation of WP:BLP1E policy.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. ☆
Bri (
talk)
16:26, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/San Francisco Gold Rush until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Welcome!
Hello, MJD86, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}}
after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Have week a nice week and god bless :) --
James, La gloria è a dio
23:05, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
James, La gloria è a dio has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hey there. I couldn't help noticing you appear to be interested in Seinfeld. I am interested in setting up a Seinfeld WikiProject to improve articles related to Seinfeld. At the moment I am just looking for people who are interested in joining. If you are interested in joining, please add your name here or contact me on my talk page. Thankyou, Joelster 06:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Whats with the edits on Alexander Mahone? Its kinda confusing me. Everyoneandeveryone ( talk) 00:12, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
WTF? I had to make alot of edits 'cuz u fucked up everything and it kept re-verting back again and again. Everyoneandeveryone ( talk) 00:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Your summary at this diff should indicate that, in addition to changing where one of the links point, you are also reintroducing disputed material. Croctotheface ( talk) 03:19, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Also, this and this. In both those cases, you were not actually undoing my edits. Do you somehow want to make it seem that I introduced nonstandard spelling or weird encoded notes? Edit summaries are permanent. If you have some issue with me, don't try to hurt my reputation by doing things like that. Croctotheface ( talk) 10:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Instead of just reverting me, could you please respond to my arguments? Why is the "Cultural References" section not OR? I am willing to concede that making the connection with the other episode is a bit more of a grey area, but the Cultural References section seems pretty clear cut to me.-- Asmodeus Samael ( talk) 18:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Would you be interested in editting at the
Simpsons wiki? It doesn't have any of the limitations that Wikipedia has, so you can add just about anything relating to the show. --
Scorpion
0422
17:59, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
{{
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
If you
vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to
Today, I am a Clown, you will be
blocked from editing. --
Scorpion
0422
05:09, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Today, I am a Clown. Note that the
three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the
three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be
blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a
consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue
dispute resolution.
Rjd0060 (
talk)
05:21, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
It's clear that you have a problem with me. There's nothing I can do or say that will change that. However, your campaign of harassment needs to stop. At some point, I'm going to stop merely removing that stuff from my talk page and eventually pursue some kind of sanctions against you. If you don't like editing here because you can't get your version of this or that page implemented, that's not my business. Don't take it out on me. Croctotheface ( talk) 19:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing at Santa's Little Helper. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. -- Scorpion 0422 04:31, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
— slakr\ talk / 07:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/MJD86 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Scorpion 0422 13:14, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Rudget . 13:32, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello, MJD86. Based on the templates on your talk page, I would like you to consider joining the Article Rescue Squadron. Rescue Squadron members are focused on rescuing articles for deletion, that might otherwise be lost forever. I think you will find our project matches your vision of Wikipedia. Note:Keep in mind that Squadron members officially state they are not inclusionists. ~~~~ |
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)
16:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
The article Fawzia Mohamed has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non-notable beauty queen, didn't win a major title.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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.
Liz
Read!
Talk!
00:58, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
The article Gaukhar Rakhmetaliyeva has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Violation of WP:BLP1E policy.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. ☆
Bri (
talk)
16:26, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/San Francisco Gold Rush until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.