User talk:24.222.47.171

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.RedRollerskate 22:37, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

February 2008[edit]

Information.svg

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Trenton, Nova Scotia, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Trenton, Nova Scotia was changed by 24.222.47.171 (u) (t) making a minor change with obscenities on 2008-02-05T04:23:59+00:00. Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 04:24, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

March 2008[edit]

Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Psychopathy, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Mattisse (Talk) 04:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.

July 2008[edit]

Information.png Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Jessica Biel has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. -- pb30<talk> 16:10, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

November 2008[edit]

Information.png Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Boxing has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. George The Dragon (talk) 21:03, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

January 2009[edit]

Information.svg

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Edmonton Oilers, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Edmonton Oilers was changed by 24.222.47.171 (u) (t) making a minor change adding "!!!" on 2009-01-31T22:14:54+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 22:15, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

April 2010[edit]

Information.svg Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Empire Theatres. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Dl2000 (talk) 03:26, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

March 2013[edit]

Please do not add or change content, as you did to Bill McEwan, without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.  HueSatLum 01:32, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

August 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm Yintan. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Aaron McGruder, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Yinta 22:47, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

7.92×57mm Mauser[edit]

Look at the muzzle energies of 7.92×57mm Mauser and the .30-06 Springfield. They both hover around 4000 Joules. There is not very much E0 difference when fired from 600 mm long barrels between these cartridges. As you observed the .30-06 derives its muzzle energy more from speed when compared to the 7.92×57mm Mauser. Since the 7.92×57mm Mauser has less case capacity and a larger bore area it functions better with shorter barrels when compared to the .30-06 Springfield despite operating at somewhat less Pmax. That makes the 7.92×57mm Mauser the more efficient of these 2 cartridges from an internal ballistic viewpoint. The .30-06 Springfield has a relatively large case for its bore area for a military service cartridge making it the more 'overbore' design. If more 'overbore' is desirable in a service cartridge is doubtful since the .30-06 Springfield was replaced by the 7.62x51mm NATO/.308 Winchester round by NATO which has more similarity with the 7.92×57mm Mauser from an internal ballistic viewpoint. In hunting situations the 7.92×57mm Mauser and the .30-06 Springfield cartridges and other 7 to 8 mm (ex) military service cartridges are quite comparable when loaded with comparable projectiles, though the 7.92×57mm Mauser and the .30-06 Springfield have comparatively high E0 levels compared to most other service cartridges. Remind only the projectile interacts with game animals and that such interaction is complex and has not much to do with energy. Calculate for yourself how much impact energy a 100 kg man running into an object at 8 m/s will generate. Do you think such an 'energetic' sprinter would have a comparable effect on larger game animals like 7 to 8 mm service rifle bullets?--Francis Flinch (talk) 19:13, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

March 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm Katieh5584. I noticed that you recently made an edit to Google Earth that seemed to be a test. Your test worked! If you want more practice editing, the sandbox is the best place to do so. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Katieh5584 (talk) 20:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)