User talk:Swimmerwinner72

Re

Yes, it's a decent stub now. When I first saw it, I thought I knew what it was (I'm a history major), but I wasn't 100% sure. Now that there's some more context, it's fine. Thanks for your work!! The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:31, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, just checkin'. Swimmerwinner72 (talk) 17:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Per a suggestion at my talkpage; do you think this could be merged into our article on infanticide? It seems like it would fit quite well there; your thoughts? The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 04:35, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, that's not a bad idea. However, it could also work with the article Middle Passage as it is about infanticide while on the Middle Passage part of the triangular trade route. Swimmerwinner72 (talk) 17:26, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

That seems good as well; what we could do is have the main content merged into Middle Passage, then put in a mention at infanticide. I can start a merge discussion, if you like. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:40, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Maybe a merge discussion. Swimmerwinner72 (talk) 17:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Written World Publications

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.

A tag has been placed on Written World Publications 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 an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance 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. ukexpat (talk) 19:11, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Written World Communications

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.

A tag has been placed on Written World Communications 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 an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance 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. ukexpat (talk) 21:19, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Swimmerwinner72. You have new messages at Ukexpat's talk page.
Message added 21:29, 1 February 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

See article talk page. Swimmerwinner72 (talk) 21:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Slave baby killings

The article Slave baby killings has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Possibly violates WP:OR, no WP:RS provided, unencyclopedic tone, not even a stub. A cursory review of material about this topic contradicts that this practice occurred "often" during the slave trade. Even if a legitimate topic, WP:TNT seems to apply here.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Kinu ^t/_c 21:41, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Infection (game)

The article Infection (game) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Claimed variant of Tag (game) with no sourced indication of notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Kinu ^t/_c 19:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

February 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Justin Bieber 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. User:TBloemink/Signature 16:22, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

The recent edit you made to Miley Cyrus constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. User:TBloemink/Signature 16:24, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Miley Cyrus. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. User:TBloemink/Signature 16:31, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Napoleon I, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. TransUtopian (talk) 16:33, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Syrthiss (talk) 16:38, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

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).

Swimmerwinner72 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

How is this a vandalism-only account? My account was taken over by the Pope for crying out loud! Swimmerwinner72 (talk) 16:49, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Decline reason:

No grounds for unblock provided. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 16:57, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

---

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.

,

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).

Swimmerwinner72 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I left my account open at a public place. I apologize for the vandalism this person caused. Swimmerwinner72 (talk) 00:54, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Well, we should keep this blocked in case someone somehow takes it over again. only (talk) 01:25, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

---

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.

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).

Swimmerwinner72 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

THAT is the answer I get?! Swimmerwinner72 (talk) 22:11, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Yes. Per WP:GOTHACKED this account cannot be unblocked Jac16888 ^Talk 22:15, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

---

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.

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Swimmerwinner72 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

This is ridiculous. My account was left open at a public place, and now look what happened. 98.219.123.213 (talk) 16:06, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=This is ridiculous. My account was left open at a public place, and now look what happened. [[Special:Contributions/98.219.123.213|98.219.123.213]] ([[User talk:98.219.123.213|talk]]) 16:06, 6 January 2013 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=This is ridiculous. My account was left open at a public place, and now look what happened. [[Special:Contributions/98.219.123.213|98.219.123.213]] ([[User talk:98.219.123.213|talk]]) 16:06, 6 January 2013 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=This is ridiculous. My account was left open at a public place, and now look what happened. [[Special:Contributions/98.219.123.213|98.219.123.213]] ([[User talk:98.219.123.213|talk]]) 16:06, 6 January 2013 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}