|
Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as List of Masonic hoaxes, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:44, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Masonic investigations 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/List of Masonic investigations 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:21, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you
vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at
Stanley McChrystal, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
SarekOfVulcan (talk)
21:04, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 21:18, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
|
Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as List of Masonic hoaxes, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:44, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Masonic investigations 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/List of Masonic investigations 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:21, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you
vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at
Stanley McChrystal, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
SarekOfVulcan (talk)
21:04, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 21:18, 25 November 2011 (UTC)