User talk:S2grand

Hello S2grand! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Seed 2.0 18:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Wikipedia tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Attribution • Neutral point of view • Notability Conflict of interest • Autobiography Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Citing sources • Footnotes Image use policy • Copyrights • Fair use External links • Spam • Vandalism Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry What Wikipedia is not • Deletion policy

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The "perfect" article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Hi S2grand, I just wanted to take a minute to say hi, welcome and good job. Additionally, I've included a few links for your reference and taken the liberty to make some changes to Howard Carwile. If you have any questions or need any help, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thanks.-- Seed 2.0 18:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

October 2007[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Rudy Giuliani, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are already familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add your original reference to the article. Thank you. Anastrophe 00:22, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to Rudy Giuliani. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add your original reference to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Thank you. Anastrophe 00:35, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added recently do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. -- 71.178.193.134 (talk) 22:58, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Col. jack hawkins[edit]

A tag has been placed on Col. jack hawkins 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 or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. –Dream out loud (talk) 00:42, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikify[edit]

FYI: To wikify means to add internal links to other Wikipedia articles. Bearian (talk) 02:12, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Overlinking[edit]

Plain English words or terms whose meaning (as relevant to the context of the article) would be understood by almost all readers should not be linked, as you did on Ava Gardner. Please see Wikipedia's guideline on links to avoid overlinking. Thank you. Ward3001 (talk) 20:11, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

```Ward3001, A lot of people have no idea WHAT a Bidet is, it was appropriate to link to it```` s2grand

Edit warring[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Ava Gardner. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Ward3001 (talk) 02:26, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

````And just what is your position with Wikipedia? ```` s2grand

February 2009[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Geronimo. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. RJaguar3 | u | t 01:42, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions, including your edits to Joe the Plumber. However, please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not be libelous. Any controversial statements about a living person added to an article, or any other Wikipedia page, must include proper sources. Thank you.-- The Red Pen of Doom 00:06, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsey Graham[edit]

Please do not continue to re-add unsourced POV commentary to articles as you have done to Lindsey Graham. Material and analysis in articles needs to be cited to reliable sources. -- The Red Pen of Doom 20:13, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TheRedPenOfDoom, If you were from South Carolina you would know that the Reconstruction period were very dark days for South Carolina & that Radical Republicans dealt with South Carolina harshly & has been documented hundreds of places. And what is your official relationship with Wikipedia? The above is the reason that Republicans weren't elected for a long time, South Carolinians remembered how harshly they had been treated. It's not a point of view but FACT!

That is not how wikipedia works. see our policy about content: WP:V and personal opinion WP:NPOV. Continued insertion of this type of inappropriate commentary will be considered vandalism and will lead to your account being blocked. -- The Red Pen of Doom 21:42, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My additions ARE NOT POINT OF VIEW but ACTUAL FACT, obviously you are not a student of American history. You have also not replied that you have any official capacity with Wikipedia. s2grand

Whether you consider them FACT or not is irrelevant. In wikipdedia article content must be verifiable and on topic. My official position with wikipedia is a volunteer user editor (as is the position of most of the contributors to Wikipedia) and as such I have given you several notices about wikipedia policy and editing procedures. I will add another one No personal attacks. If you continue to ignore the policies that have been pointed out to you and continue making disruptive edits you will be blocked. -- The Red Pen of Doom 04:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And again, your POV commentary to Lindsey Graham has been reverted. The policy has not changed in the month. Please follow Wikipedia guidelines for creating articles. -- The Red Pen of Doom 19:07, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war warning[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lindsey Graham. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. -- The Red Pen of Doom 04:41, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009[edit]

Please cease your edit warring on the David Vitter page. Please review WP:BRD and bring your ideas to the talk page. Edit warring is negatively viewed on Wikipedia, as should be obvious by now given your talk page. I compromised putting the reference into the section that already discussed the issue (footnote 151). WP:EL does not allow for the type of link you are trying to insert (over and over again) when it is used properly as a reference. Thanks. ∴ Therefore cogito·sum 04:07, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on David Vitter. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. ∴ Therefore cogito·sum 04:10, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Lindsey_Graham, you will be blocked from editing. -- The Red Pen of Doom 19:33, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

John McHugh[edit]

If the sentence about Dr. Johnson is going to remain, you need to find a source to back up the allegation. Wikipedia has a scorched-earth attitude towards unsourced claims about living people, and not only will they be shot on sight, but you'll very likely wind up blocked if you revert again. Rebecca (talk) 04:10, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IF you'd bothered to read the "No Fly List" entry you'd see it there. It's legitimate fact. How dare you threaten me with physical harm!!!!!!! User:S2grand

I'm afraid that this isn't good enough. Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability. You need to cite a source stating this particular person was on the no-fly list, particularly seeing there are other sources that contradict this claim. The requirement to cite sources for negative claims about a living person is non-negotiable, and further attempts at re-adding it will see you blocked. Rebecca (talk) 05:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for libelous edits. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below.

"Read the No-fly list" is not a defense; the onus is on the contributor to provide sourcing for any and all potentially defamatory claims. -Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Cardmaker)} 05:56, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

s2grand MY LIFE HAS BEEN THREATENED BY USER Rebecca "and not only will they be shot on sight" SHE SHOULD BE BANNED FOREVER Right now libel is the least of your worries, I do not take death threats lightly!!!! ````s2grand

I'm requesting administrator intervention, I tried editing but was blocked from editing my request. ````s2grand

In reply to your e-mail to WP:OTRS, this is not actionable. What Rebecca said that unsourced claims "will be shot on sight", not the people who add the claims. Sandstein 16:52, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong interpretation!!!! "Unsourced claims" as you say can't be "shot on sight", people can be!!!! Ergo you're weaseling. Why would any sane person use such language? Seems like there are a lot of people making a lot of threats on Wikipedia, not very user-friendly. SHE STILL SHOULD BE BANNED FOREVER FOR SUCH OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE!!! S2grand (talk) 17:20, 3 June 2009 (UTC)s2grand[reply]

Katie Morgan[edit]

Until you can add sources (see WP:RS) for the material you are adding to the Katie Morgan, please stop adding it back in. Dismas|^(talk) 00:10, 22 May 2010 (UTC) KMA[reply]

You are now a Reviewer[edit]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:38, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

links[edit]

It is nice of you to provide edit summaries (I wish everyone did), but for your sake I thought I'd let you know that it would be sufficient for you to say "links", "wikilinks", "wikify", or something of the kind when that's all you're doing. -Rrius (talk) 19:18, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

June 2011[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Victor Orsatti, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. additionally, it's entirely unencyclopedic, see wikipedia is not for genealogical entries tedder (talk) 03:28, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced content, as you did to Victor Orsatti. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. tedder (talk) 01:07, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User:Tedder. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Thank you. Valfontis (talk) 03:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning; the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Ernie Orsatti, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. tedder (talk) 03:36, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Paul Fix[edit]

Howdy,

1) Do you have a reference for this:

"His daughter Marilyn married actor Harry Carey, Jr. in 1944."

2) Why did you, would you, put that in "Career" when it has nothing to do with his career?

> Best O Fortuna (talk) 04:28, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Winchester '73[edit]

This is good work but, don't ya think it's a massive overkill ? Do you really think it needs to be stated that it was filmed in black & white ? It was filmed in 1950 there were no color T V's then. The poker hands, really ? do you plan to a scene by scene account ? Most people would probably rather watch the movie, it's a great one I've seen it at least 15 times. Oh don't forget to mention what kind of stamp Jimmy put a hole in. Cheers Mlpearc (powwow) 19:30, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You've got a message![edit]

Hello, S2grand. You have new messages at Chip123456's talk page.
Message added 16:58, 29 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 16:58, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You've got a message![edit]

Hello, S2grand. You have new messages at Chip123456's talk page.
Message added 17:01, 29 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Please watch my talk. Chip¹²³⁴⁵⁶ 17:01, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 23[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited The Last Wagon (1956 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Panic in the Streets (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:09, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Swope[edit]

Do you have a reference for your edit that his parents were Jewish. Currently the citation given, doesn't support the claim.842U (talk) 14:13, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that there is no reference given in his brother's article. To correctly add the information to Swope's article, you need to provide an actual citation, from a notable source (not original research). Otherwise, the information does not meet requirements for verifiability.842U (talk) 10:23, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, S2grand. You have new messages at 842U's talk page.
Message added 01:57, 1 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Ebikeguy (talk) 01:57, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, Kenneth hawks[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Kenneth hawks. 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 – Kenneth Hawks. 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 Kenneth Hawks – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. 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. Osarius - Want a chat? 18:43, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know you are able to move pages to a new title? This includes capitalisation of words in the title you may have missed. Just click the arrow on the top right side of the page, and click Move. Saves you having to duplicate articles, and saves our volunteer admins some work too ;) Osarius - Want a chat? 18:57, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 3[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Phillips Smalley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page A Day at the Races (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:45, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Francis McDonald, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Lash (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating The Lash (1930 film), S2grand!

Wikipedia editor Gareth E Kegg just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Great work, keep up the awesome editing.

To reply, leave a comment on Gareth E Kegg's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Nomination of William Robert Plumlee for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article William Robert Plumlee is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Robert Plumlee until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Viriditas (talk) 00:34, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

January 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm Brianhe. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Chuck Hagel because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! This edit was not constructive. Brianhe (talk) 21:33, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm putting an Edit Warring note here because you have failed to come to talk to discuss this - and now someone's actually put false facts in there. so it needs to be hashed out on talk page. CarolMooreDC 14:38, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

I agree with Carol. Please engage in the the talk page discussion. --Nstrauss (talk) 21:11, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

S2grand, I responded to your comment on my talk page. Please keep the conversation civil and join the discussion on the Chuck Hagel talk page. --Nstrauss (talk) 22:27, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also responded by saying bring it to the article talk page. Thanks. CarolMooreDC 23:22, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking more about it, your 3 reverts in 25 hours and your refusal despite 3 editors' request to go to the talk page already is enough to take you to edit warring. So please try to collaborate with us at the talk page. CarolMooreDC 23:30, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

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. Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:05, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To enforce an arbitration decision, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for a violation of WP:1RR at Chuck Hagel, disruptive editing, and personal attacks. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing arbitration enforcement blocks and follow the instructions there to appeal your block. Bbb23 (talk) 22:59, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice to administrators: In a March 2010 decision, the Committee held that "Administrators are prohibited from reversing or overturning (explicitly or in substance) any action taken by another administrator pursuant to the terms of an active arbitration remedy, and explicitly noted as being taken to enforce said remedy, except: (a) with the written authorization of the Committee, or (b) following a clear, substantial, and active consensus of uninvolved editors at a community discussion noticeboard (such as WP:AN or WP:ANI). If consensus in such discussions is hard to judge or unclear, the parties should submit a request for clarification on the proper page. Any administrator that overturns an enforcement action outside of these circumstances shall be subject to appropriate sanctions, up to and including desysopping, at the discretion of the Committee."

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).

S2grand (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

It takes 2 or more to have an edit war. The info I added was correct and cited. Why does one user have right to delete it? Who made her Queen? I feel if I'm blocked from editing so should Carol Moore. She never did say why she felt inclined to delete my info. This isn't Jr. Hi.

Decline reason:

The article is under a 1 revert restriction due to a special arbitration remedy. You violated that restriction. As the block has been identified as arbitration enforcement, if you still want to appeal it you need to follow the instructions at WP:AEBLOCK. Unless you do one of the three things listed there, you cannot be unblocked, and will need to wait for the block to expire. Monty ₈₄₅ 18:50, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[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.

consensus[edit]

S2grand, if I may I make an honest suggestion, editing on Wikipedia requires more than simply making "correct" and well-cited edits. One of the most important things is that nearly all decisions are made by consensus. This means you have to convince other editors to work with you. If you feel that someone has reverted one of your edits improperly then you may need to engage in the discussion on the article's talk page and explain your point of view. Also, you don't win anyone over by engaging in personal attacks. For more information you might want to review WP:CONSENSUS and WP:NPA. --Nstrauss (talk) 20:23, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nstrauss, As I said before this isn't Jr. Hi & you don't need to jump in to something that doesn't concern you because you want to make "Brownie points" with your study hall buddy. Facts are facts & the whole story should be told whether you & your buddy agree or not. And what part of "I don't give a damn what you think" didn't you understand?

John O. Brennan[edit]

Please stop using the external links section of John O. Brennan to make indirect commentaries about Brennan. You've been around long enough to know that external links are for links to neutral, encyclopedic websites that provide a greater depth of detail than can be accommodated on Wikipedia. They are almost never to periodicals and certainly not to opinion pieces. See WP:ELNO for more. Acroterion (talk) 21:32, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ray McKinnon (actor), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chrystal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:16, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 10[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Holiday (play), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Phillip Barry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

June 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ibra Charles Blackwood may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

|order = 97th Governor of South Carolina]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:40, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 11[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Racket (1927 play), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ambassador Theatre (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:07, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Wingless Victory (play), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Barry Kelly (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:27, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Her Master's Voice (play), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Max Gordon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:29, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited William Challee, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Joy in the Morning (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

House of Connelly[edit]

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of House of Connelly, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://ibdb.com/production.php?ID=11173.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 21:00, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 16[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Both Your Houses, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Joseph Sweeney (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 11[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Montgomery Clift, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Julie Harris. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:06, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 16:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of More Live as Hell[edit]

The article More Live as Hell has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NMUSIC, no substantive coverage by independent and reliable sources.

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. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:43, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Live as Hell[edit]

The article Live as Hell has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NMUSIC, no substantive coverage by independent and reliable sources.

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. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:44, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sonny Moorman:Live at the Cincy Blues Fest[edit]

The article Sonny Moorman:Live at the Cincy Blues Fest has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NMUSIC, no substantive coverage by independent and reliable sources.

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. Jon Kolbert (talk) 22:55, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, S2grand. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]