User talk:Worthadonkey

File:Crystal 128 gadu.png Welcome, Worthadonkey!

Hello, Worthadonkey, and welcome to Wikipedia! I'm Wolf530, one of the thousands of editors here at Wikipedia, and I certainly do I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

  The five pillars of Wikipedia

  How to edit a page

  Help pages

  Tutorial

  How to write a great article

File:Crystal Clear app kate.png   Manual of Style

  Fun stuff...

Here are a few thoughts that I think will help you on your way...

• Don't worry too much about being perfect -- very few of us are! If you want a fast way to learn how to avoid the little faux-pas around here, we have a page called "avoiding common mistakes" that will give you a head start.
• Need more help? Check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, first. If that's not helpful enough, you can go to my talk page and click the + button next to "edit" to ask me a question. Or, you can type {{helpme}} here on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.
• Whenever you're using a talk page, don't forget to sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. It helps us keep track of who is saying what!
• Looking for something to do? Click "Random Page" on your sidebar (on the left). Or, check out the "open tasks" list.
• Before you do anything else, be sure to tell us about yourself! Feel free to drop me a line on my talk page as well -- I like getting new messages just as much as anyone else.
• Wherever you go, remember: be BOLD!

I hope I have not overwhelmed you with information. Again, welcome -- and enjoy being a Wikipedian! --Wolf530 (talk) 04:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Sir, (Not)worthadonkey.

Sir, (Not)worthadonkey, with your due apology, I am reverting your edits from Hinduism. Though, appealing and appreciatable it will meet lot of objections. Pl. place your matter on talk page for discussion before including in the article.

Once again apologising for removal of your edit.

Swadhyayee 04:52, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

November 2006

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Academies@Englewood, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. See this link for details regarding your recent vandalism. It will not be tolerated. Alansohn 22:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Your edits to Christianity in India

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Christianity in India. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --thunderboltz^(Deepu) 14:05, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Mitchell Ravitz

A tag has been placed on Mitchell Ravitz, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable (see the guidelines for notability here). If you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please write {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

Please read the criteria for speedy deletion (specifically, articles #7) and our general biography criteria. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Hatch68 04:34, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism Warning

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Passenger Pigeon, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Hatch68 04:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Academies @ Englewood

I removed your edits to the Academies @ Englewood page for the following reasons:

• Nothing you added was sourced or verifiable.
• Everything you added was all opinion.
• Your additions were nothing more but slander and hatred being expressed for rival dwight morrow high school. Please contribute more constructively to wikipedia.

Northjersey 21:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Again I removed your edits. Some lines you wrote can not be in the article unless you can cite a source in a newspaper. For example, "Dwight Morrow Students do not know how to manage their time wisely," can not be included in the article unless you can find a source. That sentence is an opinion and may even be considered an attack. This is an encyclopedia, not the opinion section of the bergen record. The only way that line can be included in this article is if you can find it in any publsihed source. And it would have to be in quotes. Everything from the Dwight Morrow point of view can be found in the Bergen Record (a published source). Please do not add your personal opinions back into the article. Thank you. Northjersey 00:45, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

-The controversy section is still biased. It shows only the side of Dwight Morrow, not academy students. I think either it should all be deleted (except for information with a specific source) or people should stop deleting all the information that is seen on the A@E side of the DM vs AE conflict.

Christina McHale

Your recent contribution(s) to the Wikipedia article Christina McHale 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 How to cite sources. Thanks! Valrith 22:39, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Second warning

Your recent contribution(s) to the Wikipedia article Christina McHale did not provide specific references or sources. 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. Editors may choose to remove material you have contributed if it is not verifiable. Please provide specific references in your contributions to any books, articles, websites or other reliable sources that will allow people to verify the content. You can use a citation method listed at inline citations that best suits each article. Valrith 20:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Third warning

Contributions to any article must be sourced in a verifiable manner. "People who know her told me so" does not qualify as verifiable. Local newspaper coverage, for example, is a verifiable source; "She told me so herself" is not. (And please refrain from vandalizing people's user pages the way you did that of Valrith earlier tonight.)--Orange Mike 02:42, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Hanuman Test

Thank you for experimenting with the page Hanuman on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. TheRingess (talk) 15:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Republican Party

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to Republic Party (United States), you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Natalie 19:00, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalise Wikipedia, as you did to Republican Party (United States), you will be blocked from editing. Quadomatic 19:17, 25 February 2007 (UTC) (last warning)

Tiger

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalise Wikipedia, as you did to Tiger, you will be blocked from editing. Quadomatic 19:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC) (last warning)