July 2020

The general notability guideline stipulates that in order for a subject to be worthy of a standalone article, significant coverage that addresses the subject in detail is required, to the point that original research that involves extracting information is not needed. Merely being mentioned in a source whose primary purpose is to cover an entirely different subject does not necessarily satisfy this guideline. Once notability has been established, some of these sources may be useful in verifying additional information, but they should not be used as a reason why the subject is notable. Thank you.

- FlightTime (open channel) 21:03, 21 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Bob Crane; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:08, 21 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

FlightTime

@FlightTime: this is a standard template to quash naive editors, and does not apply to my contribution, you are are either being capricious or have a personal/professional reason to delete documented additions to Bob Crane. Please argue each deletion in the mass reversion you have made.

0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 21:14, 21 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@FlightTime: this is another standard template to quash naive editors, and does not apply to my contribution, you are are either being capricious or have a personal/professional reason to delete documented additions to Bob Crane. Please argue each deletion in the mass reversion you have made.

Please stop repeatedly adding that non-free image at All You Need Is Love. You might like to familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's requirements regarding the inclusion of non-free content: WP:NONFREE. Specifically, at WP:NFCCP, it says all 10 criteria need to be met. The image you want to add fails #8: Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. It also fails #1: No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose. As stated with my first revert, a similar, free image currently appears towards the end of the article. Thanks, JG66 (talk) 18:06, 4 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JG66: there is no "equivalent", this is the picture and the only one. I did not use the image on the page, only a reference link. All WP:NFCCP criteria are met. Looks like you own "The Beatles".... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 18:25, 4 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is a free equivalent – a girl holding a flower out to a military policeman, used in the last section of the article. This picture adds nothing. There's only a comment from Ringo Starr, and he's only referring to the idea of love, peace, putting flowers in guns, not to that particular event, let alone that particular image. Anyway, it's third-party coverage that's needed.

Looks like you need to read up about using non-free content on Wikipedia. JG66 (talk) 18:31, 4 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@JG66: This picture was everywhere for 10 years after, there is no other picture putting a flower in a gun. .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 18:40, 4 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I repeat, read up about Wikipedia's approach on this issue. And: it's third-party coverage that's needed, to establish the image's significance to the subject. And how can you say that, with just a comment from one of the band members to draw a vague connection, the image remotely satisfies the criterion "only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding" ... JG66 (talk) 18:49, 4 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

−

Wikipedia Books basically don't exist any more -- the Offline Content Generator was deactivated because there was no interest in maintaining it, the Books namespace was deprecated, and all existing books were deleted. The replacement "Download PDF" link is just running a copy of Chrome on a server and uses it's built in "print to PDF" function, so there is no option to convert it to other formats (since printing and converting are entirely different processes). You can, however, use MediaWiki2LaTeX (https://mediawiki2latex.wmflabs.org/) to convert pages to EPUB. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 13:36, 24 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikipedia Books basically don't exist any more -- the Offline Content Generator was deactivated because there was no interest in maintaining it, the Books namespace was deprecated, and all existing books were deleted. The replacement "Download PDF" link is just running a copy of Chrome on a server and uses it's built in "print to PDF" function, so there is no option to convert it to other formats (since printing and converting are entirely different processes). You can, however, use MediaWiki2LaTeX (https://mediawiki2latex.wmflabs.org/) to convert pages to EPUB. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 13:36, 24 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, 0mtwb9gd5wx Thank you for creating Anne Paulsen. User:Celestina007, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with ((Re|Celestina007)). Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ . (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.) Celestina007 (talk) 23:20, 28 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Celestina007: HOWTO:

• User:Slugger O'Toole/sandbox : template
• User:Slugger O'Toole/women : list

.... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 00:10, 29 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have responses.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:23, 8 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please stop adding bare URLs to articles. Learn how to add citations correctly, and stop giving other editors unnecessary work in clearing up the mess you leave behind. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:55, 3 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is hardly a polite way for one person to address another. Best to all, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 21:08, 27 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, 0mtwb9gd5wx. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that User:0mtwb9gd5wx/CalFile-Draft-1, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:02, 22 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:56, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:The Beatles: Get Back for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 03:30, 28 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do not use misleading edit summaries when making changes to Wikipedia pages, as you did to Iris. This behavior is viewed as disruptive, and continuation may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. —swpb^{T • go beyond • bad idea} 14:40, 29 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fillmore West, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page KQED.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 30 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi 0mtwb9gd5wx, hope that you're well. I was wondering if you'd be able to participate in a Signpost interview in your capacity as a contributor to WP:COVID19? I am enthusiastic about these interviews because they help remind other Wikipedians about the passionate and diverse group of volunteers that edit Wikipedia, and into the many discussions and editors that inhabit our space, nooks and crannies. If you had time to even answer a few questions here (User:Tom (LT)/sandbox/WikiProject COVID19 interview draft) I'd be very grateful :). Tom (LT) (talk) 22:44, 9 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for contributing to the article Royal Oldham Hospital. However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. Please help by adding more sources to the article you edited, and/or by clarifying how the sources already given support the claims (see here for how to do inline referencing). If you need further help, you can look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia, or ask at the Teahouse, or just ask me. Thank you. Dormskirk (talk) 10:54, 22 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi - Please do not change / remove the referencing as you did on this article. It is very difficult to find the original sources if another editor changes or removes the referencing without justification. Thank you. Dormskirk (talk) 11:14, 22 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. In this edit, you restored content (unsupported by the reference) with a suggestion that editors/readers should "check street view". Perhaps I'm misunderstanding, but what (exactly) should readers/editors check street view for? To confirm that, as of 2021 or 2022, that houses "are" (present tense) being built opposite Tydavnet's community centre? Firstly, given that the street view cameras haven't visited that area since 2019 how would such a claim possibly be supported by a firsthand check of street view? And, secondly, how is "editors/readers go and check street view yourselves" anything other than WP:OR? Guliolopez (talk) 19:54, 15 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Template:Ui and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 17#Template:Ui until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Q28 (talk) 12:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, 0mtwb9gd5wx. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Clear Linux (UK), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:01, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your edit to Kansas State University has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 14:46, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

She is LYING ! 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 18:02, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Lard Almighty (talk) 18:27, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Lard Almighty: the content of the template Diannaa used in this section is baseless. 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 18:50, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Even if that is the case, do not attack other editors or you will be blocked. Lard Almighty (talk) 18:53, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Lard Almighty: It was not ‎ Personal attack directed at a specific editor it disputes Diannaa actions 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 18:56, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Accusing someone of lying (in all caps no less) is definitely a personal attack directed at a specific editor. Stop it. Lard Almighty (talk) 18:59, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Lard Almighty: The baseless use of the template is not an opinion, it is fantasy. There is no defense for Diannaa action. 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 19:10, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You need to go to the talk pages of these templates and get them changed, since none of them meet your guidelines. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:19, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Talk:WQXR-FM, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. BlueboyLINY (talk) 02:26, 20 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Talk:WNYC-FM, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. BlueboyLINY (talk) 02:27, 20 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Talk:WNYC (AM), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. BlueboyLINY (talk) 02:28, 20 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Did you ever find the response to this question?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:50, 11 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An article you recently created, Michael Walker (writer), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Lopifalko (talk) 06:42, 16 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at WNYC-FM, you may be blocked from editing. BlueboyLINY (talk) 06:16, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at WNYC (AM). BlueboyLINY (talk) 06:19, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your recent editing history at WNYC-FM shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. BlueboyLINY (talk) 06:20, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:0mtwb9gd5wx reported by User:BlueboyLINY (Result: ). Thank you. BlueboyLINY (talk) 07:46, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've removed your third opinion request because they did not comply with the requirements to obtain a third opinion, primarily that there was no thorough discussion of the dispute on the article talk pages. All moderated content dispute resolution processes at Wikipedia require a thorough discussion between the parties before seeking assistance. — TransporterMan (TALK) 21:42, 18 February 2022 (UTC) (Not watching this page)Reply[reply]

I have removed your user warnings from Talk:WNYC, Talk:WNYC-FM, Talk:WNYC (AM), and Talk:WQXR-FM. User warnings do not belong on article talk pages. You are experienced enough to know the difference between user talk pages and article talk pages. Placing these warning templates on article talk pages is purely disruptive editing. Please do not do this again. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 23:27, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do not ever give this sort of response to anyone, you failed to welcome them, you failed to tell them that you appreciate the fact that they are asking questions, your reply was dismissive and sounded passive aggressive, I’m not sure I’m seeing you as an official host, please you can either choose to be very polite at Teahouse or refrain from answering questions there if you cannot be polite, Nick Moyes, 331dot & Cullen328 toil very hard to see that the Teahouse is the friendliest place a newbie can come and feel loved and appreciated answers like the one you gave is very much counter productive. Celestina007 (talk) 22:33, 7 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Celestina007It was helpful hint. Take a break. .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 22:42, 7 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please moving forward indent properly, "It was helpful hint. Take a break" proves my point, do you not see how dismissive you just sounded? You must! as a matter of necessity be polite to newbies, this is why when responding to a newbie any Teahouse host worth their salt begins by saying “hello and welcome to the Teahouse" being consciously polite, patient and giving a well thought out response to each question asked is very much key, all this traits as a matter of necessity must be present & if you can’t understand that then respectfully you shouldn’t be answering questions there. You can choose to learn or not that really is left for you to decide. I won’t address this any further nor reply you. Celestina007 (talk) 23:00, 7 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

0mtwb9gd5wx, brusque, unhelpful answers are not acceptable at the Teahouse. You could have done much better than that. Cullen328 (talk) 22:54, 7 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on HAVEN Helpline requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.caea.com/Features/Haven-Helpline. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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 deleted 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. PRAXIDICAE💕 19:51, 26 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Historyproject.org.uk interviewee has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Le Deluge (talk) 23:35, 26 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, thank you for adding the oral history info & reference to Association for Computing Machinery! I'm inclined to dispute the Category addition, though, since ACM is not primarily an oral history organization. Looking at other items in , most are oral history offices and organizations specifically. So, I would recommend we remove the category, but keep the content. Otherwise, (1) far too many pages would be categorized as "oral history" and (2) this page should have far too many other categories, which are currently not listed. Thoughts? Caleb Stanford (talk) 17:37, 27 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Hovercar into Hovercraft. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted ((copied)) template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 20:29, 4 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DanCherek the article about the fictional Hovercar had content about small, personal Hovercraft that I rewrote for both pages, it should only be at Hovercraft. ... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 01:41, 5 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Text you added to Hovercraft in this edit was originally added to Hovercar as early as 2013 (see this diff), and when you copy text that someone else has written from one Wikipedia article to another, attribution is required. I have done this for you this time in the edit summary of this edit. DanCherek (talk) 01:46, 5 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What I meant was, it really should be a move. 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 01:54, 5 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DanCherek: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hovercraft&oldid=1086250525 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 02:11, 5 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for adding that template, and for your work on the articles! DanCherek (talk) 02:12, 5 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place ((Ds/aware)) on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Nil Einne (talk) 14:17, 6 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Documentary television series available on YouTube, fee-free has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Le Deluge (talk) 11:59, 19 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, List of drinks that that use the word martini. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Martini. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Martini. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, 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 deleted 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. PRAXIDICAE💕 00:38, 22 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, 0mtwb9gd5wx,

I have detagged this article as it doesn't duplicate Martini (cocktail) but I think you should try to merge the two articles as there is not enough content on List of drinks that that use the word martini to warrant a separate article on the subject. Try to incorporate the information in the main Martini article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:05, 23 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on List of Trojans for Representative Government members requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a club, society, or group that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 deleted 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. DGG ( talk ) 22:26, 25 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An article you recently created, List of Trojans for Representative Government members, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Bbb23 (talk) 11:20, 26 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User:0mtwb9gd5wx/List of Trojans for Representative Government members, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:0mtwb9gd5wx/List of Trojans for Representative Government members and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:0mtwb9gd5wx/List of Trojans for Representative Government members during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. DGG ( talk ) 15:24, 28 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi 0mtwb9gd5wx! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Reliable Source: Sydney Morning Herald?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread. See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing ((bots|deny=Muninnbot)) on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 2 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, 0mtwb9gd5wx. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Michael Walker (writer), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 07:04, 19 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I notice you have copied material verbatim from this page and pasted it into 2022 monkeypox outbreak in the United States. This is against international copyright law, and against the policies of Wikipedia. Please don't do this again. It's a serious infraction.--Quisqualis (talk) 01:23, 28 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Quisqualis: I did not, everything I wrote was cited, anything verbatim was quoted. .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 02:21, 28 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just read the post below. We are expected not to use direct quotation as a shortcut instead of using our own words. You violated Wikipedia policy.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:10, 28 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

IT is not a direct quote, is a paraphrase , read source! ... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 04:59, 28 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Quisqualis: See: Wikipedia:Help_desk#Quisqualis .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 18:59, 28 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello 0mtwb9gd5wx! While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Quisqualis (talk) 01:38, 28 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Directorate-General for Regional Policy and Cohesion requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 deleted 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Singularity42 (talk) 18:28, 28 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is a Disambiguation page ... Wikipedia:Disambiguation...Disambiguation (disambiguation) ..... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 18:56, 28 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Shirley Jackson. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Deor (talk) 23:57, 3 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

By the way, what Franklin's book (the ref for the sentence in question) says is that her childhood home "was located at 1609 Forest View Road (now Forest View Avenue)".

@Deor: By the way, what page in Franklin's book is:

My grandfather was an architect, and his father, and his father. One of them built houses only for millionaires in California and that's where the family wealth came from, and one of them was certain that houses could be made to stand on the sand dunes of San Francisco, and that's where the family wealth went

0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 00:37, 4 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't know, but the quotation can be seen near the bottom of this (unnumbered) page of an e-book version. According to the notes in the book, the sentences are quoted from Jackson's autobiographical piece "The Ghosts of Loiret", which can be found on page 241 of Let Me Tell You: New Stories, Essays, and Other Writings. Deor (talk) 13:51, 4 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Please do not add uncited material to articles, as you did with the Alumni section you added with this edit, as this violates Wikipedia's Verifiability policy. I genuinely appreciate the work you've done to shore up the uncited material in that article ([1][2]), but this does not mean you can add an entire section of uncited material, simply because it is in list form, or consists of wikilinked entries. If those articles have citations for those subject's tenure at Top Gun, the you have to add them. You cannot just add a list of wikilinked subjects as a substitute for this. (Please see WP:CIRCULAR.) With all due respect, since you've racked up over 9,000 edits in the two years that you've been here, you should not be doing that. Thank you. Nightscream (talk) 19:13, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place ((Ds/aware)) on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. — Newslinger talk 04:18, 2 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On 29 September 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Hilary Mantel, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:43, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Dress. Toddst1 (talk) 02:41, 12 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A wikilink? This is petty! 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 02:56, 12 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations

added a link pointing to SSI

Markook (bread)

added a link pointing to Saj

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. My name is Danise and I work for Jacuzzi. I saw that you were the biggest contributor to the hot tub and Jacuzzi pages and was hoping you might be willing to take a look at Talk:Jacuzzi#Draft for consideration. I disclosed a conflict of interest and proposed an expanded History. Danise Lopes (talk) 17:48, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wanted to check in on this. You responded at Talk:Jacuzzi with a list of book and press citations used in the proposed draft. I wasn't sure what you meant by it. Danise Lopes (talk) 23:19, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wow the additions are amazing. Should I push to mainspace or draft? Now I feel like I’m hoarding it. 😝 jengod (talk) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

read the reference citations, can you determine where the mosaics are? then look at these:

• google Search: LAX tile|mosaic tunnel|Hallway|passageway
• what is the best name for the page?
• are you in L.A. ?

• https://www.kcrw.com/culture/shows/design-and-architecture may have info
• Los Angeles Public Library may have info

• find articles that should wikilink to LAX color tunnels
• tag it stub and publish!

.... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 03:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also WP:Women in red: Janet Bennett ... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 03:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:48, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I’ve started an RSN discussion about The Cultural Gutter, one of the sources you added to Kamikaze Hearts (film). Wanted to let you know in case you’d like to put in your 2 cents. The link is Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#The Cultural Gutter. ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 21:50, 12 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, 0mtwb9gd5wx. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "List of Trojans for Representative Government members".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 11:23, 27 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have been indefinitely blocked from editing Chippendales for promotional editing against consensus. You may make well-referenced edit requests at Talk: Chippendales. Please read the Guide to appealing blocks. Cullen328 (talk) 16:40, 27 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

0mtwb9gd5wx (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Chippendales has no notice on the article page, and no notice on the talk page about mentioning the first name of Bruce Nahin. I did not know about WP:NEWSWEEK. A minor edit to remove Newsweek citation and content would seem to be an appropriate approach. This excessive REVERT seems to imply some interests by Cullen328‏‎ (autopatrolled, administrator) (Created on 2009-06-28 at 16:22:56). This seeems to be abuse by an administrator with a WP:COI with this article's subject. Since there is no notice about the ban on Bruce Nahin, this response seems Kafkaesque 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 10:44, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 12:34, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the ((unblock)) template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

The assertion that I have a conflict of interest with the Chippendales is false and no evidence has been presented, because it does not exist. My only interest in the article is as an administrator, and my goal is to prevent disruption of the article. Cullen328 (talk) 18:25, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

.

Category:Female models born in 1960s has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bearcat (talk) 04:50, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I'm DaxServer. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Reserve Bank of India have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. — DaxServer (t · m · c) 13:14, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Physician and comedian has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bearcat (talk) 23:57, 15 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Have just reverted your edit to Ralph Rugoff. Adding 13 extra sources, with no new article content is a clear case of citation overkill. Recommended reading, I think. Edwardx (talk) 12:38, 11 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@0mtwb9gd5wx please read what is written here. This is still relevant in light of your edits to The Moscow Times article. Renat 08:21, 29 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An article that you have edited or that may interest you, (Clitoris), has content that I have proposed to be removed and moved to another article, (Human clitoris). If you are interested, please visit the discussion. Thank you. Peaceray (talk) 05:40, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks. Rendering "Curad" in all capital letters or in italics or with a trademark symbol is not correct. Please revert. Cullen328 (talk) 01:07, 10 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An article you recently created, David Gritten, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:02, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I can see here that you have already been warned about edit warring many times. Please discuss your proposed changed on the article's talk page, if necessary. Grayfell (talk) 07:34, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are wrong. .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 07:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Grayfell:quote"The burden is on you to establish consensus for this. Instead of an obscure primary source republished on a flaky social media platform, summarize reliable, independent sources."

San Francisco Chronicle social media account! .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 07:43, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Toddst1 were:

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

WP:DOB supported by WP:BLPPRIMARY.

No indication that merely being in Tibet has anything to do with education.

Personal life section begins with an incomprehensible sentence. Grammatical errors throughout the article.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Albert Lin and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Toddst1 (talk) 21:11, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I made no such submission.... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 23:07, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Radio stations licensed before 1923 and still broadcasting has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:08, 22 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. I have reverted an edit of yours on this article, and would like to remind you about WP:BRD. When your Bold edit has been Reverted by another editor, the recommended next step, if you continue to think the edit is necessary, is to Discuss the dispute on the article talk page with other editors, but not to re-revert it, which is the first step to edit warring, a disruptive activity which is not allowed. Discussion on the talk page is the only way we have of reaching consensus, which is central to resolving editing disputes in an amicable and collegial manner, which is why communicating your concerns to your fellow editors is essential. While the discussion is going on, the article generally should remain in the status quo ante until the consensus as to what to do is reached (see WP:STATUSQUO).

Please remember that as the person attempting to make a change to the article, the WP:ONUS is on you to justify the change, and to get a consensus if it is disputed; and again, please do not edit war.

To help move things along, I have started a discussion on the article talk page about the disputed edit, which you will find here. Please take the opportunity to make your views known there. It is best not to restore the material you added until there is a consensus among the editors there to do so. Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:13, 4 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Beyond My Ken: Your objection is unclear, I added a picture of the article...?...0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 17:53, 4 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

12th SS Panzer Division Hitlerjugend

added a link pointing to Hungarian oilfields

II SS Panzer Corps

added a link pointing to Hungarian oilfields

Operation Spring Awakening

added a link pointing to Hungarian oilfields

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

non-specific cite on those pages, formerly no link at all. not best, but better....0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 08:50, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on The Harkles requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 deleted 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. David Gerard (talk) 20:54, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article The Harkles has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence that the neologism is actually notable.

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. BangJan1999 20:58, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article Blue Pill (sedative) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Considering that most of these come in different colours, it hardly is a distinctive characteristic of them, thus fails WP:NLIST.

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. Fram (talk) 14:22, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

not a list but a disambiguation 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 15:18, 22 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I'm Fakescientist8000. An edit that you recently made to Château Élysée seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 23:29, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

are you pretending? 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 23:36, 5 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@0mtwb9gd5wx: I'm going to jump in here and second that you are edit warring over trying to shoehorn Colonial House (West Hollywood, California) into the Château Élysée article. The two buildings have nothing in common. The MOS:SEEALSO policy states: "Links in this section should be relevant".

Your insults (x2) to Fakescientist8000 are unprofessional and unwelcome. Your edit summary explanation of "RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS FOR HOLLYWOOD STARS" doesn't explain why you think Colonial House should be mentioned in the Château Élysée article. Château Élysée (also known as the Manor Hotel) is owned by the Church of Scientology's Celebrity Centre International for over 50 years. The building hasn't been a "residential apartment" for anyone during that time. In fact, the building hasn't been a "residential apartment for celebrities" for almost a hundred years! What happened back in the 1920s/1930s is so far back in time as to be WP:UNDUE to even mention Colonial House unless you have some historical source which discusses both buildings at the same time with some sort of comparison or connection. Grorp (talk) 00:44, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seconded. I don't appreciate uncivil attacks on me, I can tell Grorp doesn't, and you should be aware that Wikipedia doesn't, either. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 00:55, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

what attack? .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 00:59, 6 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Church of Scientology .........0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 10:39, 11 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article An open scholarship has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No context or explanation of the subject, arbitrary and extremely partial list of open scholarship recipients

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. User:sfjohna

@Sfjohna:why no (timestamp) ? .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 10:30, 11 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

the list of open scholarship recipients includes all articles of people that state such on their wikipedia page and, later, some that were located and are wikipedia-notable. .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 10:36, 11 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

True, but the "article" is still not more than a dictionary definition, thus not really suitable for an encyclopedia entry. Her Pegship (?) 19:35, 12 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Blackout gag. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. ☀DefenderTienMinh⛤☯☽ (talk) 15:32, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

nonsense 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 15:33, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. Wikipedia aims to provide a safe environment for its collaborators, and harassing other users, as you did on User talk:DefenderTienMinh07, potentially compromises that safe environment. If you continue to harass other editors, you may be blocked from editing. ☀DefenderTienMinh⛤☯☽ (talk) 15:33, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

this is ridiculous 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 15:38, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on WLS-TV. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 18:24, 29 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wow, you'd think with all of these warnings and your current block, you might have learned to be more collaborative. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 14:33, 3 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Helps improve the quality of the article Akane Yamaguchi. Thanks you very much. 116.100.212.103 (talk) 15:19, 3 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Chinese home run, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL" error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 23:49, 10 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, 0mtwb9gd5wx. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:David Gritten, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 13:00, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did on the Russell Brand article. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Please stop Edit warring and resolve this issue on the Russell Brand talk page.The One I Left (talk) 20:46, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Evening. Is there any chance you could self-revert your recent links to Parrot Analytics? Of the ones I checked, redirecting to The Global TV Demand Awards provides no information of the actual subject, making them kind of pointless. – ².O.^Boxing 00:17, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An article for Parrot Analytics is important see Draft:Parrot Analytics. Read the citations. Parrot Analytics seems to be the third party in the 2023 Writers Guild of America strike.

.... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 00:23, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your links direct to The Global TV Demand Awards, not Draft:Parrot Analytics (because that's not allowed in mainspace). The Global TV Demand Awards provides no additional information on Parrot Analytics, making it useless. – ².O.^Boxing 00:26, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

actually it does, you are not reading

.... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 00:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you want to be a dickhead about it then I'll revert your pointless edits myself, seeing as you can't provide any rationale beyond 'but look, there's a draft!'. – ².O.^Boxing 00:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

.... – ².O.^Boxing 00:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Marathon over. Rollback applied. It's worth noting that I wasn't the only person to revert you. – ².O.^Boxing 08:21, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Megabits000 (talk) 00:51, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, thank you for your contributions to G.I. pocket stove. Unfortunately eBay listings are not reliable sources. They are user–generated content, and they will be deleted some time after the auction ends, rendering them unverifiable. Furthermore, live commercial links are generally not allowed as they are borderline spam. It'd be great if you could supply some reliable sources such as history books or scholarly journal articles. The patent citations are good, but please fill them out into complete citations; bare URLs are uninformative and prone to link rot. Hairy Dude (talk) 11:50, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Virtual restaurant indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:14, 5 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, 0mtwb9gd5wx,

Please read Virtual restaurant. Most of the restaurants you put into this category, like TGIFridays, Dennys and Applebees, are not virtual restaurants but existing, brick and mortar establishments and do not meet the definition of virtual restaurants as explained in that article. Please do not miscategorize articles. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:19, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

they also operate as virtual restaurants 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 18:57, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have recently made edits related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. This is a standard message to inform you that articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. - Hipal (talk) 01:16, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just spent a while undoing almost everything you did to the disambiguation page Iris, because it was wrong. Specifically:

1. You removed several apparently valid entries without explanation.
2. MOS:DABSHORT: "Keep the description associated with a link to a minimum, just sufficient to allow the reader to find the correct link."
3. MOS:DABNOENTRY: "Do not include entries for topics which are not mentioned in any article, even if there is an article on a related topic, since linking to it would not help readers find information about the sought topic." IRIS (Management Festival) and the student newspaper fall under this rule.
4. WP:LONGDAB: "all entries that fall within that subject area must be there [in that section]." and "For one or two items that fit in multiple sections: duplicate these entries in each appropriate section." Iris (transponder) and Internet Routing in Space are part of "Astronomy and spaceflight"; IRIS (astronomical software) is also software.

If you're going to edit dab pages, please re-familiarize yourself with the guidelines and explain all your changes in edit summaries. —swpb^{T • beyond • mutual} 15:12, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

hey that all was prior work by others, it looks like you are just reverting pages I have also edited 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 01:25, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, it wasn't. Look at the page history. All the changes I undid were made by you, no one else, in exactly two edits at 20:16 and 20:21, 10 October, both with the vague edit summary "Expanding article". This is the only page I'm aware of that both you and I have edited, so I have no idea what "pages" you're talking about. —swpb^{T • beyond • mutual} 14:44, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I undid your edit of 28 October 2023: a, b. You linked the name as if it had a biographical article; however, your edit redirects to "List of British Vogue cover models" because there is no Wikipedia biography for actress Donna Mitchell. Please double-check your edits before you publish them. Pyxis Solitary (yak yak). Ol' homo. 05:58, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Hills Hoist. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Nardog (talk) 04:21, 4 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at List of feature films with lesbian characters. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted. Reason: You were informed on 28 October 2023 about linking the name of a person to an article that is not a biography about the individual, and redirecting to an article that had nothing to do with the person. This second time you linked a redirect to the biography of photographer Bob Richardson that mentions the individual was a model and "later an actress", but is not a biographical account about the person.
Your stubbornness in refusing to understand why these redirects are not links to a specific biography nor even a section that delves into biographical material about a person has turned into disruptive editing. Please stop this behavior. Pyxis Solitary (yak yak). Ol' homo. 05:38, 13 November 2023 (UTC) Pyxis Solitary (yak yak). Ol' homo. 05:38, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is a bio page. The person does not need to have a full article. Stop stifling awareness about a woman. .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 16:41, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is not her bio page. What you linked in the Richardson bio merely says she was a Ford model, an actress, and an important subject for Richardson's photography -- that's it. If you feel so strongly about this individual, why don't you create a biography article about her? Put your effort into doing things right. Pyxis Solitary (yak yak). Ol' homo. 10:51, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Hills Hoist, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 15:10, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, 0mtwb9gd5wx. This message is being sent to inform you that a request for a contributor copyright investigation has been filed at Contributor copyright investigations concerning your contributions to Wikipedia in relation to Wikipedia's copyrights policy. The listing can be found here. Thank you. — SamX [talk · contribs] 05:52, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article Open Culture has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:OR that is not related to the sources cited

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) 10:00, 19 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Keith Gill. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use your sandbox. Thank you. skarz (talk) 04:41, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, the introduction of inappropriate pages, such as Tad's Steaks, is considered vandalism and is prohibited. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. 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 deleted 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. C_(u)w_(t)C_(c) 05:02, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Films condemned by the Legion of Decency has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. --woodensuperman 10:36, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]