| Hello, Outedexits, and welcome to Wikipedia! Here are some pages that will help you to find your way around, understand key policies and guidelines, and develop your contributions: | ||
| help and information | contributing to articles | policies and guidelines |
Please
sign your name whenever you leave a comment by using four tildes (~~~~), which produces your name and the date. Whenever you edit a page, even if the edit is minor, you should include a descriptive
edit summary. If you need help, visit the
help desk, or place {{helpme}} and a question on your talk page and someone will respond shortly. If you would like mentoring, you can join the
adopt-a-user project. I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia and find it a rewarding experience.
Thehøtwheelsguy99
Talk?
Sign!! 21:27, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
| ||
Hello, thanks for vandalizing my user page and also for changing the counter when you did it. Thehøtwheelsguy99 Talk? Sign!! 22:44, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
- @
Thehotwheelsguy99:I actually just updated the counter, but if you want me to actually vandalize it to make it legit, just let me know. Also, you should user a simpler signature. Yours is currently too long and disruptive.
Outedexits (
talk) 22:47, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
- You think my sig is too long? You should see some suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuper long ones people have. By the way, why did you even update my counter? My user page hasn't been vandalized yet...lol, if you want to vandalize it, you can so the counter is actually correct.
Thehøtwheelsguy99
Talk?
Sign!! 22:50, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Done We are working on a shorter sig now. :) --Thehotwheelsguy99
- Who are "we"? Are you more than one user?
Outedexits (
talk) 22:56, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
- "We" can be used as one person. --Thehotwheelsguy99
- I fixed my signature so it is only 5 lines :) Thehøtwheelsguy99 | Talk? Sign!! 01:05, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
- "We" can be used as one person. --Thehotwheelsguy99
- Who are "we"? Are you more than one user?
Outedexits (
talk) 22:56, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
- You think my sig is too long? You should see some suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuper long ones people have. By the way, why did you even update my counter? My user page hasn't been vandalized yet...lol, if you want to vandalize it, you can so the counter is actually correct.
Thehøtwheelsguy99
Talk?
Sign!! 22:50, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
|
Hi Outedexits! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Rosiestep ( I'm a Teahouse host) This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot ( talk) 17:21, 28 October 2015 (UTC) |
Speedy deletion nomination of Dinkleberry
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Dinkleberry, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.
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. JTtheOG ( talk) 20:16, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the page
Sleep , because they 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.
Materialscientist (
talk) 22:20, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- @ Materialscientist: I added a referece to replace the citation needed that. What's the problem exactly? Outedexits ( talk) 22:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Somnolence, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Depression. 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) 10:12, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Gilliam. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of
your recent contributions to
Sleep because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks. –
Gilliam (
talk) 03:41, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Are you Tetra quark? Isambard Kingdom ( talk) 03:53, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- Uh, is that another user on wikipedia? If so, no. Outedexits ( talk) 03:57, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- Now I'm curious. Why did you ask that? Outedexits ( talk) 04:46, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
I suggest you read this essay which quotes the policies showing that it is not a relativist project WP:NOTRELATIVISM, Second Quantization ( talk) 09:38, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
I am informing you that I have opened a sock puppet investigation of you at [1]. Thank you, Isambard Kingdom ( talk) 14:57, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello Outedexits. I appreciate that you have a strong opinion regarding the choice of lede image on the Muammar Gaddafi article, but that doesn't give you the right to be un-civil and rude (see Wikipedia:Civility) or to engage in flagrant Edit Warring. I cut you some slack because you appeared to be a new and inexperienced editor, but you are being persistent in your incivility and refusal to play by Wikipedia policy. As per the BOLD, Revert and Discuss cycle, you (not I) are expected to open up a discussion at the Talk Page to present a case for your proposed change. If you like, I can put in a Request for Comment and get more editors involved, but please ensure that your future behaviour is more in line with our policies here at Wikipedia. Thank you, Midnightblueowl ( talk) 16:37, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- @
Midnightblueowl: Look, let's make a few things clear. First, I'm aware of the three revert rule, and I am within its limits. I did not edit war. Second,as I said in my edit summary, you are the one who has to seek consensus to change the image. As I said, you were bold in adding the new image (or old? It's from 40 years ago) , I reverted you, and now you should open a discussion in the talk page. That's exactly what
WP:BRD says.
Outedexits (
talk) 16:49, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- Edit warring is not simply about the Three Revert Rule; you were edit warring but had yet to breach the Three Revert Rule, at which disciplinary action might have been taken (against us both, incidentally). Moreover, I am not the one who initially incorporated the 1973 image into the lede. That was done by another user, and it remained in place for some time. On occasion other editors would change it to the 2009 image, and it would get reverted (including, at times, by myself). In the most recent instance, it is yourself who have been BOLD by removing a longstanding lede image and replacing it with your choice; I then reverted you, to which you embarked on an edit war. Anyway, I'm going to take this to RFC and see what comes of that.
Midnightblueowl (
talk) 16:57, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- @ Midnightblueowl: Just start a discussion in the talk page. I'm still waiting for you to do that. Outedexits ( talk) 17:04, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- Edit warring is not simply about the Three Revert Rule; you were edit warring but had yet to breach the Three Revert Rule, at which disciplinary action might have been taken (against us both, incidentally). Moreover, I am not the one who initially incorporated the 1973 image into the lede. That was done by another user, and it remained in place for some time. On occasion other editors would change it to the 2009 image, and it would get reverted (including, at times, by myself). In the most recent instance, it is yourself who have been BOLD by removing a longstanding lede image and replacing it with your choice; I then reverted you, to which you embarked on an edit war. Anyway, I'm going to take this to RFC and see what comes of that.
Midnightblueowl (
talk) 16:57, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
 | This account has been
blocked indefinitely as a
sock puppet of
Tetra quark (
talk ·
contribs ·
global contribs ·
page moves ·
user creation ·
block log). Banned or blocked users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia; if you are
banned, all edits under this account may be reverted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may
appeal this block by first reading the
guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{
unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below.
Euryalus (
talk) 08:44, 7 November 2015 (UTC) |
I am informing you that I have initiated a sock puppet investigation concerning you: [2]. Isambard Kingdom ( talk) 15:13, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Outedexits. 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)
| Hello, Outedexits, and welcome to Wikipedia! Here are some pages that will help you to find your way around, understand key policies and guidelines, and develop your contributions: | ||
| help and information | contributing to articles | policies and guidelines |
Please
sign your name whenever you leave a comment by using four tildes (~~~~), which produces your name and the date. Whenever you edit a page, even if the edit is minor, you should include a descriptive
edit summary. If you need help, visit the
help desk, or place {{helpme}} and a question on your talk page and someone will respond shortly. If you would like mentoring, you can join the
adopt-a-user project. I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia and find it a rewarding experience.
Thehøtwheelsguy99
Talk?
Sign!! 21:27, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
| ||
Hello, thanks for vandalizing my user page and also for changing the counter when you did it. Thehøtwheelsguy99 Talk? Sign!! 22:44, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
- @
Thehotwheelsguy99:I actually just updated the counter, but if you want me to actually vandalize it to make it legit, just let me know. Also, you should user a simpler signature. Yours is currently too long and disruptive.
Outedexits (
talk) 22:47, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
- You think my sig is too long? You should see some suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuper long ones people have. By the way, why did you even update my counter? My user page hasn't been vandalized yet...lol, if you want to vandalize it, you can so the counter is actually correct.
Thehøtwheelsguy99
Talk?
Sign!! 22:50, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
- Done We are working on a shorter sig now. :) --Thehotwheelsguy99
- Who are "we"? Are you more than one user?
Outedexits (
talk) 22:56, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
- "We" can be used as one person. --Thehotwheelsguy99
- I fixed my signature so it is only 5 lines :) Thehøtwheelsguy99 | Talk? Sign!! 01:05, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
- "We" can be used as one person. --Thehotwheelsguy99
- Who are "we"? Are you more than one user?
Outedexits (
talk) 22:56, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
- You think my sig is too long? You should see some suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuper long ones people have. By the way, why did you even update my counter? My user page hasn't been vandalized yet...lol, if you want to vandalize it, you can so the counter is actually correct.
Thehøtwheelsguy99
Talk?
Sign!! 22:50, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
|
|
Hi Outedexits! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Rosiestep ( I'm a Teahouse host) This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot ( talk) 17:21, 28 October 2015 (UTC) |
Speedy deletion nomination of Dinkleberry
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Dinkleberry, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.
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. JTtheOG ( talk) 20:16, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the page
Sleep , because they 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.
Materialscientist (
talk) 22:20, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- @ Materialscientist: I added a referece to replace the citation needed that. What's the problem exactly? Outedexits ( talk) 22:22, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Somnolence, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Depression. 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) 10:12, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Gilliam. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of
your recent contributions to
Sleep because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks. –
Gilliam (
talk) 03:41, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Are you Tetra quark? Isambard Kingdom ( talk) 03:53, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- Uh, is that another user on wikipedia? If so, no. Outedexits ( talk) 03:57, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- Now I'm curious. Why did you ask that? Outedexits ( talk) 04:46, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
I suggest you read this essay which quotes the policies showing that it is not a relativist project WP:NOTRELATIVISM, Second Quantization ( talk) 09:38, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
I am informing you that I have opened a sock puppet investigation of you at [1]. Thank you, Isambard Kingdom ( talk) 14:57, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello Outedexits. I appreciate that you have a strong opinion regarding the choice of lede image on the Muammar Gaddafi article, but that doesn't give you the right to be un-civil and rude (see Wikipedia:Civility) or to engage in flagrant Edit Warring. I cut you some slack because you appeared to be a new and inexperienced editor, but you are being persistent in your incivility and refusal to play by Wikipedia policy. As per the BOLD, Revert and Discuss cycle, you (not I) are expected to open up a discussion at the Talk Page to present a case for your proposed change. If you like, I can put in a Request for Comment and get more editors involved, but please ensure that your future behaviour is more in line with our policies here at Wikipedia. Thank you, Midnightblueowl ( talk) 16:37, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- @
Midnightblueowl: Look, let's make a few things clear. First, I'm aware of the three revert rule, and I am within its limits. I did not edit war. Second,as I said in my edit summary, you are the one who has to seek consensus to change the image. As I said, you were bold in adding the new image (or old? It's from 40 years ago) , I reverted you, and now you should open a discussion in the talk page. That's exactly what
WP:BRD says.
Outedexits (
talk) 16:49, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- Edit warring is not simply about the Three Revert Rule; you were edit warring but had yet to breach the Three Revert Rule, at which disciplinary action might have been taken (against us both, incidentally). Moreover, I am not the one who initially incorporated the 1973 image into the lede. That was done by another user, and it remained in place for some time. On occasion other editors would change it to the 2009 image, and it would get reverted (including, at times, by myself). In the most recent instance, it is yourself who have been BOLD by removing a longstanding lede image and replacing it with your choice; I then reverted you, to which you embarked on an edit war. Anyway, I'm going to take this to RFC and see what comes of that.
Midnightblueowl (
talk) 16:57, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- @ Midnightblueowl: Just start a discussion in the talk page. I'm still waiting for you to do that. Outedexits ( talk) 17:04, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- Edit warring is not simply about the Three Revert Rule; you were edit warring but had yet to breach the Three Revert Rule, at which disciplinary action might have been taken (against us both, incidentally). Moreover, I am not the one who initially incorporated the 1973 image into the lede. That was done by another user, and it remained in place for some time. On occasion other editors would change it to the 2009 image, and it would get reverted (including, at times, by myself). In the most recent instance, it is yourself who have been BOLD by removing a longstanding lede image and replacing it with your choice; I then reverted you, to which you embarked on an edit war. Anyway, I'm going to take this to RFC and see what comes of that.
Midnightblueowl (
talk) 16:57, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
|
| This account has been
blocked indefinitely as a
sock puppet of
Tetra quark (
talk ·
contribs ·
global contribs ·
page moves ·
user creation ·
block log). Banned or blocked users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia; if you are
banned, all edits under this account may be reverted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may
appeal this block by first reading the
guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{
unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below.
Euryalus (
talk) 08:44, 7 November 2015 (UTC) |
I am informing you that I have initiated a sock puppet investigation concerning you: [2]. Isambard Kingdom ( talk) 15:13, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Outedexits. 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)