Welcome!
Hello, Rsradford, 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 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!
And now, my own words outside of that template:
Figured I would give you the standard 'Welcome' template links. If you actually get serious with editing here, I will send you my old list of useful stuff from when I had an account on Wikipedia.
-P-
Can you tell me if any action is pending on this?
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lotte Motz. 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 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.
Rsradford, I undid your latest edit at the noticeboard. You realize that administators patrol that noticeboard, right? You and Jack can both be blocked if you continue in that tone. Rephrase whatever you wanted to say without commenting on the character of the editor. If needed I will remove the other guy's personal attacks as well. EdJohnston ( talk) 16:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lotte Motz. 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 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. Consider this a last warning. If you revert again, you will be blocked. Please resolve the discussion on the talk page; see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. PeterSymonds (talk) 16:50, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
If we wish to foster a collaborative editing environment it is vital that editors do not make ad hominem remarks and comment only on opinions and content rather than disparaging other editors. You were previously advised to avoid personal attacks by EdJohnston ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) here.
Unfortunately, you have continued to use insult and abuse in your talk page comments. As examples, these personal attacks are completely unacceptable:
Because of this I have blocked you from editing for 24 hours.
If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.
CIreland ( talk) 13:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I am trying to establish what the situation is with the article Lotte Motz and need some clarification of issues you have raised. I have protected the article from editing pending a resolution of the issues.
You have made a number of reversions, most recently this with an assertion that the reverted version plagiarized another text. Could you clarify:
I'd be grateful if you could respond as quickly as possible so that the issues can be resolved in a timely fashion.
Thanks.
CIreland ( talk) 19:06, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
I am glad you have moderated your language at the page being discussed above. I have warned the other editor appropriately about his. Please remember to just talk about the article; it may help to not refer to each other by name. DGG ( talk) 14:47, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello Radford. Thank you for contributing to the Þorgerðr Hölgabrúðr and Irpa and article - I am always glad for constructive help. However, I have reverted your reference additions as they are not actually cited within the article, something I am certain of as I wrote nearly the entire article from scratch. Of course, we certainly can cite these authors in the theories sections if they've presented appropriate theories in the works you've listed. :bloodofox: ( talk) 18:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rsradford,
I'm asking Wikipedians who are interested in
United States legal articles to take a look at
WP:Hornbook, the new "JD curriculum task force".
Our mission is to assimilate into Wikipedia all the insights of an American law school education, by reducing hornbooks to footnotes.
What you can do now:
Regards, Andrew Gradman talk/ WP:Hornbook 05:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering if you'd be interested in this topic? -- A Certain White Cat chi? 00:28, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District, Rsradford!
Wikipedia editor Ad Orientem just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Outstanding new article!
To reply, leave a comment on Ad Orientem's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
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) 13:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Rsradford, 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 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!
And now, my own words outside of that template:
Figured I would give you the standard 'Welcome' template links. If you actually get serious with editing here, I will send you my old list of useful stuff from when I had an account on Wikipedia.
-P-
Can you tell me if any action is pending on this?
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lotte Motz. 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 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.
Rsradford, I undid your latest edit at the noticeboard. You realize that administators patrol that noticeboard, right? You and Jack can both be blocked if you continue in that tone. Rephrase whatever you wanted to say without commenting on the character of the editor. If needed I will remove the other guy's personal attacks as well. EdJohnston ( talk) 16:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lotte Motz. 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 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. Consider this a last warning. If you revert again, you will be blocked. Please resolve the discussion on the talk page; see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. PeterSymonds (talk) 16:50, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
If we wish to foster a collaborative editing environment it is vital that editors do not make ad hominem remarks and comment only on opinions and content rather than disparaging other editors. You were previously advised to avoid personal attacks by EdJohnston ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) here.
Unfortunately, you have continued to use insult and abuse in your talk page comments. As examples, these personal attacks are completely unacceptable:
Because of this I have blocked you from editing for 24 hours.
If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.
CIreland ( talk) 13:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I am trying to establish what the situation is with the article Lotte Motz and need some clarification of issues you have raised. I have protected the article from editing pending a resolution of the issues.
You have made a number of reversions, most recently this with an assertion that the reverted version plagiarized another text. Could you clarify:
I'd be grateful if you could respond as quickly as possible so that the issues can be resolved in a timely fashion.
Thanks.
CIreland ( talk) 19:06, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
I am glad you have moderated your language at the page being discussed above. I have warned the other editor appropriately about his. Please remember to just talk about the article; it may help to not refer to each other by name. DGG ( talk) 14:47, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello Radford. Thank you for contributing to the Þorgerðr Hölgabrúðr and Irpa and article - I am always glad for constructive help. However, I have reverted your reference additions as they are not actually cited within the article, something I am certain of as I wrote nearly the entire article from scratch. Of course, we certainly can cite these authors in the theories sections if they've presented appropriate theories in the works you've listed. :bloodofox: ( talk) 18:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rsradford,
I'm asking Wikipedians who are interested in
United States legal articles to take a look at
WP:Hornbook, the new "JD curriculum task force".
Our mission is to assimilate into Wikipedia all the insights of an American law school education, by reducing hornbooks to footnotes.
What you can do now:
Regards, Andrew Gradman talk/ WP:Hornbook 05:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering if you'd be interested in this topic? -- A Certain White Cat chi? 00:28, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for creating Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District, Rsradford!
Wikipedia editor Ad Orientem just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Outstanding new article!
To reply, leave a comment on Ad Orientem's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
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) 13:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC)