User talk:Bry456
Your lack of comments with any of your edits to Saturday Night Live articles make it very difficult to determine what changes are valid and what may be vandalism. Further complicating things is that none of this information is sourced, making virtually all of it original research.
I reverted this edit, where you removed an entry about Gwen Stefani appearing on the show. Can you clarify why you made this change? Thanks! Strom 05:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- I changed it because I checked the site listed and found no evidence of Ms. Stefani appearing on the show on Dec. 2. It must have been a rumor. Therefore, I deleted the information.
- I also added the Criticism section because I felt one was needed. I am a big fan of show and know a lot about the history and behind the scenes type things. I put links to what I felt was important information. Thank you--Bry456 16:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- It sounds like you have a lot of factual information to contribute, but please use the Edit Summary field. This page is regularly vandalized and none of the information has any sources, so edit summaries are crucial (see Wikipedia:Edit_summary):
Always fill in the summary field. This is considered an important guideline. Even a short summary is better than no summary. An edit summary is even more important if you delete any text; otherwise, people may think you're being sneaky. Also, mentioning one change but not another one can be misleading to someone who finds the other one more important; add "and misc." to cover the other change(s). Accurate summaries help people decide whether it is worthwhile for them to check a change.
- Thanks! Strom 21:06, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay, no problem. I think I misunderstood. --Bry456 17:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC) 11:38, Bry456 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- Looking good! Thank you again for your contributions to Wikipedia and implementing the suggested changes. Good luck in the future. Strom 00:55, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Your recent contribution(s) to Wikipedia are very much appreciated. However, you did not provide references or sources for your information. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a drive to improve the quality of Wikipedia by encouraging editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. If sources are left unreferenced, it may count as original research, which is not allowed. Can you provide in the article specific references to any books, articles, websites or other reliable sources that will allow people to verify the content in the article? You can use a citation method listed at inline citations that best suits each article. Thanks! Anthony Rupert 15:00, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
2016 Summer Olympic Bids[edit]
Hello, how are you? I reverted your edits deleting "Potential bid cities" as it is part of the history of the 2016 bids. However, taking your point under consideration, I renamed the section "Cancelled bids". I hope that will be more to your liking. If you still are dissatisfied, please start a discussion on the page. Thanks for your contributions; they are appreciated! -Cbradshaw 07:51, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm fine. No problem. I just felt at the time it was unnecessary to continue to list those place since 7 cities made the bid deadline and they are official. Thank you. ---Bry456 21:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
June 2008[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Kansas City, Missouri. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Grey Wanderer | Talk 19:54, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Moving articles to new names[edit]
I see that you are moving several articles that have numerous links to new names. Many of these articles are extensively linked to. I hope that you also correct all the links that go to those articles.Americasroof (talk) 17:26, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
- On this topic, I have reverted your redirect of Neighborhoods of Chicago, for the time being. While I agree that it should be redirected, I also think that much of the content should be merged. I'll be happy to take this task on, as I know a lot about Chicago geography, but I also think it's important that we come to a firmer resolution at Talk:Community areas of Chicago#Community areas of Chicago / Neighborhoods of Chicago merger discussions. --Peter Talk 04:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
United States presidential election, 2012[edit]
Thank you for your edits, however, the current consensus is to include all candidates considered notable by wikipedia's standards. See WP:N for wikipedia's standard of notability.--William S. Saturn (talk) 22:09, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)