User talk:Haxwell

Hello Haxwell and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

• To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
• Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
• If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
• Follow the Wikipedia:Simplified Ruleset
• Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
• Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
• Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

Pete Rock

You should seperate the article. Like the Kanye West article is. The production credits are in their own article. take a look.--Jaysscholar 00:46, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to have participated in the demise of your anonimity, atleast as far as the WF playlist project is concerned :) Irishgeek (talk) 00:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Caroline Lacroix Baroness Vaughan.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Caroline Lacroix Baroness Vaughan.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:40, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Bradley Manning/October 2013 move request

Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:32, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Haxwell. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Haxwell. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer granted

Hello Haxwell. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

• URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Alex Shih^Talk 17:21, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Lords Mobile

Hello. Could you explain what wrong with article?

• This article needs additional citations for verification. (August 2017) This article relies largely or entirely on a single source. (August 2017)

You dont see citations and sources? --Алый Король (talk) 07:10, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes, there are sources. But not many. Of the six, two of them are to confirm Lords Mobile spokeswoman. Two are from Google Play, and are, for all intents and purposes, the same source. Then #3 is the only reference for the gameplay section. So, there are citations, etc. but ideally they could be more diverse and numerous. But hey, I'm just one guy on the internet. I don't even get paid to do this, so take my opinion for what its worth. Haxwell (talk) 07:26, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

None of us here is got paid (I hope so). I think that wiki doesnt have requirement for number of citations and resources. Does the game have notability? Yes, because of nomination by Google. Does article have sources? Yes. Does they affiliated with IGG? No, it's Google and media recourses. Number of sources is not regulated. So I really dont see reason for this template. --Алый Король (talk) 07:33, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Feel free to remove it. I won't be offended. Still, I feel the article needs more diverse and numerous references. Haxwell (talk) 07:43, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Your GA reviews

Sorry if I came across a bit strong when commenting on your GA review(s), though it frustrates me when I see new reviewers (which are needed!) appearing to not necessarily grasp undertaking reviews. It wasn't right of me to assume the review wasn't thorough, but from past cases, often someone on their first reviews (as you seem to be) don't always go into the depths needed. If you think an article is exceptional and you can barely find anything wrong, it may be worth (at least for your first few) asking for a second opinion so at least someone else can collaborate your own findings or suggest areas for improvement that you can use to develop your own approach. Don't be put off at all though, as new reviewers are desperately needed! Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:06, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

@Bungle: Thanks for your message.. I did check some other reviews, and saw the time reviewers put in on them, so I understand where you're coming from. Thanks for the advice.. I will ask other opinions. Haxwell (talk) 23:12, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Silent Parade

The article Silent Parade you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Silent Parade for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jackyd101 -- Jackyd101 (talk) 10:21, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi, not sure if you've seen this or what, but I've done the review and I think the article is good, just needs some tweaks. Let me know when you get to it, Best--Jackyd101 (talk) 17:21, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

If I don't hear from you by 15th November and no one else steps in, I will have to fail this article, which I don't want to have to do. Best.--Jackyd101 (talk) 23:58, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Silent Parade

Hi! I'm afraid the article has failed and can't be unfailed, but what I suggest is that you look over the comments and make the necessary changes to the article and then renominate it when its ready. When you do that, drop a note on my talk page and I'll give it another review. Sound good?--Jackyd101 (talk) 09:54, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Charles D Martin concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Charles D Martin, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

GS

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 blockchain and cryptocurrencies. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. 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.

Jtbobwaysf (talk) 07:05, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

??? Haxwell (talk) 15:22, 29 March 2023 (UTC)