Welcome!
Hello, Wiki Historian N OH, 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!
Aboutmovies (
talk) 07:29, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 00:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 00:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Done. Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 11:43, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
It is a problem to make the assertions you made in the first senetence of the entry Columbus, Ohio. For starters, the presence of the terms "ultramodern" and "clean" as they were used in the first sentence of the leading section cannot be considered to be neutral and unbiased. Not only is the definition of "ultramodern" hazy and unspecified, but there was also no citation given that demonstrates a consensus view that Columbus is an ultramodern city. Calling it clean may be appropriate, but not in the first sentence. This would be a section or subsection further down in the article, perhaps giving information on the city's public infrastructure. JEN9841 ( talk) 21:24, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Your September 2010 editing to the Columbus, Ohio, page appears to have all the subtlety and and sensitivity of a bull in a china shop. You don't appear to respect other people's work on this page at all, and that is a problem, I think. Jack B108 ( talk) 03:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
??? Added and contributed...
Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 03:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Arena District Columbus.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 06:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat ( talk) 06:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
I wanted to take a moment to thank you for your very helpful edits on the pages for Jan Janszoon and Anthony Janszoon van Salee. They are now much more in useful articles and are more in line with wikipedia standards. It has also given me a few additional sources to pursue in my research on them. Do you know if that play you sourced is translated to english anywhere, or will be performed outside of the netherlands anytime soon? Thank you. Gecko G ( talk) 00:02, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Added some more stuff and sources. Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 18:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
No problem. You can create a new page for II here, just make sure to overwite the #REDIRECT. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 16:49, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, as you forgot on your recent edit to Frederick VIII of Denmark. Thank you. Law Lord ( talk) 01:41, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the compliment and awareness of edit summaries. Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 02:32, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for reading my compliments. Cheers. -- Law Lord ( talk) 02:43, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I feel like your actions have not been reflective of the accepted practices on Wikipedia. First of all, you appear to refuse to recognize the significance of WP:CONSENSUS. Everyone else who has weighed in on this matter has disagreed with you. Can you point to one single editor who has written in support of your position?
Even so, the single voice in the wildnerness can, in theory, be the voice of truth. But if yours is such a voice, I am finding it almost incoherent at times. I have already asked you about the following statements of yours which I find confusing:
and I have asked you to re-explain yourself. But you ignore my questions.
You also stated the banner is neutral; I gave a full-one paragraph statement as to why I did not agree with that statement. You have not seen fit to rebut that paragraph. Your strongest argument has been that this matter is ambiguous. Perhaps so. That's why we don't let a single editor make decisions in the event of disagreements. But you've never once explained why you think that WP:CONSENSUS doesn't apply to you or your article.
You also need to learn some courtesy. In this edit, you said--to an editor who had never before edited this page--that he needed to "stop vandalizing". What he did was easily justifiable, but regardless of whether you agree with it or not there is not one administrator on Wikipedia that would concur with your assessment of his edit as "vandalism". That was just rude and uncalled for.
So I will be reporting this to WP:ANI, if you place the banner back up there before we have a serious and open discussion which arrives at consensus. That's just the way it works around here, by consensus. Check it out. 98.82.23.93 ( talk) 20:36, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
As you have certainly noticed, there has been a discussion of your editing at WP:ANI#Marysville, Ohio banner. There is a consensus that your editing at that page, with respect to the "Preserve America Community" banner, was highly inappropriate. You have been persistently editing against WP:CONSENSUS, which is one of the fundamental pillars of Wikipedia. There is also some well-founded concern that other aspects of your editing in this and other articles will require cleanup, in terms of neutrality and encyclopedicity.
This is a formal warning that if you insert that banner again you will be blocked.
I also strongly urge you to use a lot of self-restraint about reverting things, if others begin to do other cleanup edits on material you contributed, which you might disagree with. I hope this can be solved without putting you on a formal revert limitation or actually blocking you, but be aware that revert-warring (even below the WP:3RR threshold) will not be tolerated. Whenever you feel you must revert something, make sure you explain it politely on the talk page first, and then wait for discussion before you actually make the edit. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 20:42, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Marysville, Ohio. 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. NeutralHomer • Talk • 22:30, 25 April 2010 (UTC) 22:30, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Please stop assuming ownership of articles such as Marysville, Ohio. Doing so may lead to disruptive behavior such as edit wars and is a violation of policy, which may lead to a block from editing. Please also read WP:CIVIL NeilN talk to me 22:34, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Wiki Historian N OH, I have taken you to 3RR for your 6 reverts of the (so far) in a 24 hour period. That is a clear violation of the WP:3RR policy here at Wikipedia. You have also, as NeilN said, violated WP:OWN and WP:CIVIL. If your reverting keeps up, I will suggest the month long perma-block be put back in place. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 22:41, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first.
Black Kite (t)
(c) 22:43, 25 April 2010 (UTC)Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 22:45, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 02:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 03:20, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Okay, what can we all agree on here? Right now, probably nothing more than this: That Wiki Historian doesn't like the way others have edited this article. So from this one thing, let's proceed to have a conversation.
Wiki Historian, without saying anything about the other editors here (nothing about their motivation, or about their personalities or their intelligence), give an example of an edit with which you disagree. Tell us why you disagree with it. Then let the others come back with their explanations. If you really want to work here, you'll have to listen--really listen--to their explanations, and then reply, again, without making it personal. Can we give this a try? It will probably take literally dozens of exchanges, but if everyone really tries, maybe we can all learn to work together. 98.82.34.167 ( talk) 09:50, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
The disagreement that stands out to me right now has to do with the picture of William Henry Harrison that was removed. Can someone explain why this was deemed inappropriate here? 98.82.34.167 ( talk) 09:54, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
This is the only warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to Marysville, Ohio, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. NeutralHomer • Talk • 20:52, 4 May 2010 (UTC) 20:52, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
This is the only warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to Marysville, Ohio, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. NeutralHomer • Talk • 04:48, 10 May 2010 (UTC) 04:48, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first.
HJ Mitchell |
Penny for your thoughts? 05:04, 10 May 2010 (UTC)This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Economy of Columbus, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Economy of Columbus, Ohio. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot ( talk) 01:19, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, when you're making additions to articles please keep WP:SIZE in mind. The article is already large as it is. Thanks, §hep Talk 01:31, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Ok. About done. Probably have to split it up into new articles like Walker did with the economy. Those dam living encyclopedias just keep growing! :) Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 01:36, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Columbus, Ohio. 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. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. I don't like having to template regulars. Please discuss any further additions on the talk page of the article. This back-and-forth is not acceptable and I'll report any further actions to AN3. §hep Talk 22:50, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 22:56, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Hey there, I reverted your edits on Bisexuality that had been previously reverted by another Wikipedia user. At best, the insertion of the other flags were non-standard, but I feel I might be detecting some bias. For example, there was a link to a site involving polyamory, which is very different from bisexuality. There were also strange references to a "Polyamory bisexuals" section on the Bisexual community page, yet such a section doesn't exist. Could you please help me understand your changes? Thanks! Kedster ( talk / contribs) 06:05, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 06:14, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. KaySL ( talk) 16:15, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive comments.
If you continue to make
personal attacks on other people as you did at
Bisexual community, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. It appears that you're engaged in an edit war on these two pages.
Kedster (
talk /
contribs) 16:35, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first. --
Cirt (
talk) 17:02, 20 September 2010 (UTC)Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sexual eugenics for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. KaySL talk 23:47, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It has been established that you engaged in
sockpuppetry by evidence presented here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sexual eugenics, and you are therefore blocked indefinitely. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal the block by adding the text {{
unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first. -
Vianello (
Talk) 03:39, 21 September 2010 (UTC) |
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ferocious osmosis for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. KaySL talk 04:20, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
just wanted to say nice work on Gerhard von Mende Decora ( talk) 17:13, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
The article Helen Butler, Countess of Ossory has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
The subject of this biographical article may not be notable. The lead says that she was a daughter of a viscount, married an earl, and lived in a castle. None of these facts establish notability. The article is sourced to Lodge (1789) but the mention is trivial.
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.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 09:01, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Wiki Historian N OH, 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!
Aboutmovies (
talk) 07:29, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 00:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 00:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Done. Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 11:43, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
It is a problem to make the assertions you made in the first senetence of the entry Columbus, Ohio. For starters, the presence of the terms "ultramodern" and "clean" as they were used in the first sentence of the leading section cannot be considered to be neutral and unbiased. Not only is the definition of "ultramodern" hazy and unspecified, but there was also no citation given that demonstrates a consensus view that Columbus is an ultramodern city. Calling it clean may be appropriate, but not in the first sentence. This would be a section or subsection further down in the article, perhaps giving information on the city's public infrastructure. JEN9841 ( talk) 21:24, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Your September 2010 editing to the Columbus, Ohio, page appears to have all the subtlety and and sensitivity of a bull in a china shop. You don't appear to respect other people's work on this page at all, and that is a problem, I think. Jack B108 ( talk) 03:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
??? Added and contributed...
Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 03:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Arena District Columbus.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 06:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat ( talk) 06:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
I wanted to take a moment to thank you for your very helpful edits on the pages for Jan Janszoon and Anthony Janszoon van Salee. They are now much more in useful articles and are more in line with wikipedia standards. It has also given me a few additional sources to pursue in my research on them. Do you know if that play you sourced is translated to english anywhere, or will be performed outside of the netherlands anytime soon? Thank you. Gecko G ( talk) 00:02, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Added some more stuff and sources. Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 18:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
No problem. You can create a new page for II here, just make sure to overwite the #REDIRECT. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 16:49, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, as you forgot on your recent edit to Frederick VIII of Denmark. Thank you. Law Lord ( talk) 01:41, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the compliment and awareness of edit summaries. Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 02:32, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for reading my compliments. Cheers. -- Law Lord ( talk) 02:43, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I feel like your actions have not been reflective of the accepted practices on Wikipedia. First of all, you appear to refuse to recognize the significance of WP:CONSENSUS. Everyone else who has weighed in on this matter has disagreed with you. Can you point to one single editor who has written in support of your position?
Even so, the single voice in the wildnerness can, in theory, be the voice of truth. But if yours is such a voice, I am finding it almost incoherent at times. I have already asked you about the following statements of yours which I find confusing:
and I have asked you to re-explain yourself. But you ignore my questions.
You also stated the banner is neutral; I gave a full-one paragraph statement as to why I did not agree with that statement. You have not seen fit to rebut that paragraph. Your strongest argument has been that this matter is ambiguous. Perhaps so. That's why we don't let a single editor make decisions in the event of disagreements. But you've never once explained why you think that WP:CONSENSUS doesn't apply to you or your article.
You also need to learn some courtesy. In this edit, you said--to an editor who had never before edited this page--that he needed to "stop vandalizing". What he did was easily justifiable, but regardless of whether you agree with it or not there is not one administrator on Wikipedia that would concur with your assessment of his edit as "vandalism". That was just rude and uncalled for.
So I will be reporting this to WP:ANI, if you place the banner back up there before we have a serious and open discussion which arrives at consensus. That's just the way it works around here, by consensus. Check it out. 98.82.23.93 ( talk) 20:36, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
As you have certainly noticed, there has been a discussion of your editing at WP:ANI#Marysville, Ohio banner. There is a consensus that your editing at that page, with respect to the "Preserve America Community" banner, was highly inappropriate. You have been persistently editing against WP:CONSENSUS, which is one of the fundamental pillars of Wikipedia. There is also some well-founded concern that other aspects of your editing in this and other articles will require cleanup, in terms of neutrality and encyclopedicity.
This is a formal warning that if you insert that banner again you will be blocked.
I also strongly urge you to use a lot of self-restraint about reverting things, if others begin to do other cleanup edits on material you contributed, which you might disagree with. I hope this can be solved without putting you on a formal revert limitation or actually blocking you, but be aware that revert-warring (even below the WP:3RR threshold) will not be tolerated. Whenever you feel you must revert something, make sure you explain it politely on the talk page first, and then wait for discussion before you actually make the edit. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 20:42, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Marysville, Ohio. 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. NeutralHomer • Talk • 22:30, 25 April 2010 (UTC) 22:30, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Please stop assuming ownership of articles such as Marysville, Ohio. Doing so may lead to disruptive behavior such as edit wars and is a violation of policy, which may lead to a block from editing. Please also read WP:CIVIL NeilN talk to me 22:34, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Wiki Historian N OH, I have taken you to 3RR for your 6 reverts of the (so far) in a 24 hour period. That is a clear violation of the WP:3RR policy here at Wikipedia. You have also, as NeilN said, violated WP:OWN and WP:CIVIL. If your reverting keeps up, I will suggest the month long perma-block be put back in place. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 22:41, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first.
Black Kite (t)
(c) 22:43, 25 April 2010 (UTC)Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 22:45, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 02:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 03:20, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Okay, what can we all agree on here? Right now, probably nothing more than this: That Wiki Historian doesn't like the way others have edited this article. So from this one thing, let's proceed to have a conversation.
Wiki Historian, without saying anything about the other editors here (nothing about their motivation, or about their personalities or their intelligence), give an example of an edit with which you disagree. Tell us why you disagree with it. Then let the others come back with their explanations. If you really want to work here, you'll have to listen--really listen--to their explanations, and then reply, again, without making it personal. Can we give this a try? It will probably take literally dozens of exchanges, but if everyone really tries, maybe we can all learn to work together. 98.82.34.167 ( talk) 09:50, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
The disagreement that stands out to me right now has to do with the picture of William Henry Harrison that was removed. Can someone explain why this was deemed inappropriate here? 98.82.34.167 ( talk) 09:54, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
This is the only warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to Marysville, Ohio, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. NeutralHomer • Talk • 20:52, 4 May 2010 (UTC) 20:52, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
This is the only warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to Marysville, Ohio, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. NeutralHomer • Talk • 04:48, 10 May 2010 (UTC) 04:48, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first.
HJ Mitchell |
Penny for your thoughts? 05:04, 10 May 2010 (UTC)This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Economy of Columbus, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Economy of Columbus, Ohio. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot ( talk) 01:19, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, when you're making additions to articles please keep WP:SIZE in mind. The article is already large as it is. Thanks, §hep Talk 01:31, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Ok. About done. Probably have to split it up into new articles like Walker did with the economy. Those dam living encyclopedias just keep growing! :) Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 01:36, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Columbus, Ohio. 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. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. I don't like having to template regulars. Please discuss any further additions on the talk page of the article. This back-and-forth is not acceptable and I'll report any further actions to AN3. §hep Talk 22:50, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 22:56, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Hey there, I reverted your edits on Bisexuality that had been previously reverted by another Wikipedia user. At best, the insertion of the other flags were non-standard, but I feel I might be detecting some bias. For example, there was a link to a site involving polyamory, which is very different from bisexuality. There were also strange references to a "Polyamory bisexuals" section on the Bisexual community page, yet such a section doesn't exist. Could you please help me understand your changes? Thanks! Kedster ( talk / contribs) 06:05, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Wiki Historian N OH ( talk) 06:14, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. KaySL ( talk) 16:15, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive comments.
If you continue to make
personal attacks on other people as you did at
Bisexual community, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. It appears that you're engaged in an edit war on these two pages.
Kedster (
talk /
contribs) 16:35, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
, but you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first. --
Cirt (
talk) 17:02, 20 September 2010 (UTC)Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sexual eugenics for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. KaySL talk 23:47, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It has been established that you engaged in
sockpuppetry by evidence presented here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sexual eugenics, and you are therefore blocked indefinitely. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal the block by adding the text {{
unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first. -
Vianello (
Talk) 03:39, 21 September 2010 (UTC) |
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ferocious osmosis for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. KaySL talk 04:20, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
just wanted to say nice work on Gerhard von Mende Decora ( talk) 17:13, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
The article Helen Butler, Countess of Ossory has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
The subject of this biographical article may not be notable. The lead says that she was a daughter of a viscount, married an earl, and lived in a castle. None of these facts establish notability. The article is sourced to Lodge (1789) but the mention is trivial.
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.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 09:01, 27 August 2022 (UTC)