Jump to content

User talk:Abbythecat

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Rorshacma (talk | contribs) at 16:06, 2 February 2024 (Notification: listing of Mammoth Studios at WP:Articles for deletion.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Welcome to Wikipedia. A page you recently created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new pages, so it will shortly be removed (if it hasn't been already). Please use the sandbox for any tests, and consider using the Article Wizard. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. You may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:29, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Godzilla Fan Newsletter/Godzillamania

[edit]

The article The Godzilla Fan Newsletter/Godzillamania has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no indication of notability. Short lived newsletter with only 7 issues.

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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} 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. noq (talk) 08:14, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Bible On Film (book)

[edit]

The article The Bible On Film (book) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non notable book - no sources to show WP:notability. Library of congress only shows it exists not that it is notable. Google search only identifies a few hits - none of them establish 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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} 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. noq (talk) 15:03, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits.
The next time you create an inappropriate page, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Please do not create hoaxes or nonsense and please don't clog the requeststed articles section with same. PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:31, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Richard H. Campbell

[edit]

The article Richard H. Campbell has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.


If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. --Darkwind (talk) 04:20, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

[edit]

Welcome!

Hello, Abbythecat, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard. Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Darkwind (talk) 04:20, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for creating hoaxes and other nonsense

[edit]
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|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

--PMDrive1061 (talk) 06:08, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]

Your nomination at Articles for Creation was declined, and Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Richard H. Campbell was not created. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer, and please feel free to request article creation again once the issues have been addressed. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Bradjamesbrown (talk) 08:43, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Richard H. Campbell, co-author, The Bible On Film: A Checklist, 1897-1980

[edit]

I have nominated Richard H. Campbell, co-author, The Bible On Film: A Checklist, 1897-1980, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard H. Campbell, co-author, The Bible On Film: A Checklist, 1897-1980. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Dengero (talk) 06:31, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Toomorrow

[edit]

I have commented at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard H. Campbell, co-author, The Bible On Film: A Checklist, 1897-1980 and offered suggestions there.

However, I also have to question the idea that Toomorrow (film) was based on a project by Campbell (and/or that his age is what you say it was). If Campbell published The Bible on Film in 1981 when he was 22, he would have to have been born around 1959. That means he would have been about 8 in 1967, when The Gang, the alleged basis of Toomorrow, was made. Toomorrow was directed by Val Guest, an experienced director who had been one of the co-directors of Casino Royale (1967 film); it was produced by Don Kirshner, who had been the music supervisor for The Monkees; and its cast included Roy Dotrice, who was already a star on Broadway and in the West End, as well as on British television. (I'm skipping over Olivia Newton-John's involvement as the star, because she was basically unknown then.) If all of this talent had devoted their efforts to a film whose source writer was then 11 years old, surely there would be lots of sources to establish that. Not too many 11-year-olds sell the motion picture rights to their audio recordings. Perhaps if Toomorrow was based on a film called The Gang, it was not necessarily the same one as the one written by Campbell, but a different project of the same name. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:20, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

[edit]
Hello, Abbythecat! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can 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 by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Spartaz Humbug! 06:58, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

Proposed deletion of R.H. Campbell

[edit]

The article R.H. Campbell has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article. The nominator also raised the following concern:

You have created this article repeatedly before. You must know by now what is required to keep it.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:19, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to add references to this article you need to cite them. Simply adding links to the page that go to other Wikipedia pages don't suffice. Please click on this link to read how. You should also think about which is the more notable, (i.e. which can you best cite) Campbell, or his book? I can find a number of mentions of the book around the web (although nothing that immediately looks like it's a good reliable source for a cite) but I don't see anything about Campbell that suggest he himself is notable. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 23:02, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. To clarify what I said above; Links in the article that go to other Wikipedia pages are useful, but are not references. References must link to a reliable source outside of Wikipedia. And these sources must specifically mention and talk about R.H. Campbell and what is being said about him on the article.
As I said, I've had a brief look, and I cannot find anything on the internet that supports most of this article. Yes, we know someone called R.H.Campbell wrote a book called "The Bible On Film: A Checklist, 1897-1980". But that's not enough. The book may be notable, but the author does not appear to be.
Wikipedia policy is insistent about this, simply to ensure that things written about people are true and fair. I hope you can understand this, and this is why the article is currently marked for deletion. That is, unless, you can provide the requested cites. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 11:56, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Specific problems about what you've added;
  • The Library Of Congress - what does this verify in the article?
  • IMDB.COM (listing for "The Sentry") - This doesn't link to "The Sentry" or "The Night Stalker" in IMDB, and the records there do not confirm any involvement by Campbell. (IMDB is also chiefly user generated content, which is not a reliable source).
  • Famous Monsters Of Filmland issue #131, 1977 {Ruth McDevitt obituary) - this is a link to Wikipedia, and the article there makes no mention of R.H. Campbell or his book anyway. What does issue #131 say about him?
  • The Jesus I Never Knew by Philip Yancey (cites book) - this is a link to Wikipedia, and the article there makes no mention of R.H. Campbell or his book anyway. What does the specific book say about him?
  • The Film Journal issue 11 (reviews book) - this is a link to Wikipedia, and the article there makes no mention of R.H. Campbell or his book anyway. What does issue 11 say about him?
--Escape Orbit (Talk) 12:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of R.H. Campbell

[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.

A tag has been placed on R.H. Campbell, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. TeapotgeorgeTalk 12:38, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
You recently made a submission to Articles for Creation. Your article has been reviewed and because some issues were found, it could not be accepted in its current form; it is now located at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Bible On Film (book). Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. Feel free to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Sir Armbrust Talk to me Contribs 14:23, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of All In Color For A Dime (Song)

[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.

A tag has been placed on All In Color For A Dime (Song) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a musical recording which does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and where the artist's article has never existed, has been deleted or is eligible for deletion itself. 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for music.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. — Finemann (talk) 01:50, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good Clean Fun (song)

[edit]

Hi. I removed a line of text on the article Good Clean Fun (song) regarding a line in the song because this content is an unsourced interpretation (ie an opinion) and doesn't belong in the article. If you have a reliable source that states this line was meant to be a "surprise twist" to give the song a "sadistic touch", I have no problem with it being added back. However, without a source supporting this assertion, this claim is simply an opinion and unencylopedic. Also, regarding this edit summary, please see WP:OWN. Thanks. Pinkadelica♣ 02:27, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I don't doubt your claims or even that Nesmith said as much in an interview but the content still needs to be cited. Simply saying he said it in a 1970 interview isn't the same as a citation. We need to know what interview he said this, who conducted it, etc. for verifiability sake - this is Wikipedia policy (WP:V). If we don't follow this policy, anyone can claim anything and simply say "so and so said it in an interview!". Please do not add this content back until it can be properly attributed. If you don't know how to properly cite the content, I will be more than happy to help you do so. Thank you. Pinkadelica♣ 03:06, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, if you have the source in front of you then you can easily source the content. Is the name of the interview "Monkee Tales #31"? Is there an author? Like I said before, if you give me the info of the source, I will add the content to the article. Also, you can't have a page deleted (whether you created it or not) because of a content dispute - once you create the page, it belongs to Wikipedia. Pinkadelica♣ 03:33, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pinkadelica, I cannot get to your talk page for some reason. I have blanked the page and nominated it for deletion. Without the line the page is junk. I have asked 2 other Wiki editors to delete it. I ask you to please nominate it for speedy deletion as well. That's all I can do. Except let me state this here -- I DISOWN AND DISAVOW THE PAGE IF THE LINE IS MISSING. Don't blame me for writing this garbage. Can't do anything else I guess except that I regret writing the page. I had no idea someone would take out THE ONLY LINE that gives it MEANING. Anyway, I hope you can somehow read this, as I can't reach your page. I respect you and your decision. I hope the feeling is mutual. Best. Attaboy, Luthor! PS - MONKEES TALE #31, pages 6-12 "Review of Present", John Conners, 1981. Abbythecat. Abbythecat (talk) 07:18, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please read this carefully - if you have the information for the source, add it along with the content to the article. There is no need to be so dramatic and "disavow" yourself from the article simply because I am attempting to follow policy and get a source for this content. This is standard and helps to better the project which is a good thing. If you don't want to look up the source, fine, but the page is not going to be deleted because one line that you think important is omitted. Again, if you need help with citing your sources I will be glad to help but you have to at least let me know where this interview came from. Pinkadelica♣ 20:09, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What you added to the article is fine. Something indicating where you culled the content from was all I asked for from the very get-go. Thank you. Lastly, there is no "taking credit" or kudos for creating or writing articles (again, please see WP:OWN). Wikipedia is a collaborative effort and most of us who edit regularly do it to better the project, not get "credit" for anything. Pinkadelica♣ 23:18, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Your message

[edit]

Hi. I have no idea what article you're referring to as I see no article entitled Horror Island. That said, some of your message was highly offensive. Calling other editors who edit a page you created as "pitiful witless vandals" is against Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Even if you do not agree with the edits another person makes, please do not call anyone a disparaging name or you may be blocked. I understand that you feel strongly about the pages you create, but I'm quite certain no one edits here in the hopes of being called a name for doing a bit of clean up to an article. It is quite rude and uncalled for. You must understand that Wikipedia is a group project - the encyclopedia that anyone can edit - and that is it highly likely anything you submit will be tweaked or completely changed by others. That is the very nature of Wikipedia. There is a very clear disclaimer below the "Save page" button that states, If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here. That means once you hit the "save" button, the content submitted belongs to Wikipedia and anyone can edit it. If you do not like that policy, perhaps you should stop submitting content to Wikipedia in general and create your blog or website where you and you alone control the content. Pinkadelica♣ 06:16, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure I told you before but in case I haven't, I cannot delete articles. It is also highly unlikely an administrator will delete an article you created simply because you don't like the fact that other people edited it. That is not how deletion works. If an article you created was intentionally vandalized (please see WP:VANDAL for what vandalism actually is), revert the edit and move on. Even if someone did add unseemly content, the no personal attacks policy still applies. I'm not sure to whom you're referring when you say "wiki people", because anyone can edit anything here. At this point I think it would be beneficial to you to contact an administrator to help you as it seems I'm not getting through. You can find a list of active administrators at this link. Pinkadelica♣ 06:45, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WP:DRV would be the place to go to request an article be undeleted. Pinkadelica♣ 22:59, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not a good reason

[edit]

Your requests here do not provide any valid reasons to undelete. All articles and edits, once submitted, are the property of the Wikimedia Foundation. There is not, nor shall there ever be such a thing as your articles. If you can consider some form of valid, policy-based reason to restore article that were deleted according to policy, then edit the REFUND page accordingly (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:30, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Not Good Reasons

[edit]

Hi, Bwilkins - That sounds fair, thanks. I know all submissions belong to Wiki. If anyone wants to restore any of the pages I asked to be restored, that'd be great. If not, that's fine, I made the mistake asking them to be deleted, so it's my fault. I appreciate your time. Thank you. Abbythecat (talk) 03:17, 10 October 2011 (UTC)AbbythecatAbbythecat (talk) 03:17, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ps- I've re-entered better reasons for why they should be restored in the hopes that this might help. Thanks. Abbythecat (talk) 05:55, 10 October 2011 (UTC)AbbythecatAbbythecat (talk) 05:55, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PSS- Hi, Bwilkins - I'm glad those pages were restored. That's very kind of Wiki after the idiotic actions of mine -- all I can tell you is, if you take bi-polar medicine, never get a shingles vaccine shot, they don't mix well -- it put my mind in the Outer Limits. Again, my apologies, and my thanks. Abbythecat (talk) 02:55, 11 October 2011 (UTC)AbbythecatAbbythecat (talk) 02:55, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Foy Van Dolsen

[edit]

The article Foy Van Dolsen has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

lack of notablity

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. St8fan (talk) 06:42, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. However, the reviewer felt that a few things need to be fixed before it is accepted. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:submit}} to the top of the article.)
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Nolelover Talk·Contribs 01:17, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{{tb / Abbythecat (talk) 02:01, 4 February 2012 (UTC) just curious, DEMON AND THE MUMMY is identical to Crackle of Death (both are movies made up of Kolchak: The Night Stalker episodes), yet Crackle of Death has a Wikipedia page ... so why isn't DEMON AND THE MUMMY worthy of one? How do they differ, in terms of importance? It's no big deal, just asking. I tried my best to add references to it. Thanks. Abbythecat.}} Abbythecat (talk) 02:01, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Abbythecat (talk) 02:02, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. However, the reviewer felt that a few things need to be fixed before it is accepted. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:submit}} to the top of the article.)
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! — Jonadin(talk) @ 02:32, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Abbythecat (talk) 06:00, 4 February 2012 (UTC)No problem, I "blanked" the submission, you are right, it's not important. Thanks. Abbycat.Abbythecat (talk) 06:00, 4 February 2012 (UTC Abbythecat (talk) 06:08, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. However, the reviewer felt that a few things need to be fixed before it is accepted. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:submit}} to the top of the article.)
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! :- ) DCS 07:21, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your article has been moved to AfC space

[edit]

Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:Abbythecat/Jack grinnage has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jack grinnage, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article, if you have any questions please ask on my talk page! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 23:38, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.


Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! :- ) DCS 00:51, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Richard Hanley

[edit]
Hello, Abbythecat. You have new messages at Jonadin93's talk page.
Message added 14:49, 17 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.


Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 00:54, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

[edit]
Hello, Abbythecat. You have new messages at Alpha Quadrant's talk page.
Message added 02:08, 18 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 02:08, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replied. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 00:45, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Replied again. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 01:07, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: can i propose pages be deleted or not?

[edit]
Hello, Abbythecat. You have new messages at Jonadin93's talk page.
Message added 00:45, 20 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]
[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Looney Tunes: Back in Action, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kevin McCarthy (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) 10:15, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:58, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Cheers! Stella BATPHONEGROOVES 06:47, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Gold Standard 07:26, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
Mammoth Studios, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:09, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

A Little Bit Me, a Little Bit You (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Davy Jones
The Monkees Greatest Hits (Colgems) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Davy Jones

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:47, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-warring, (non-)minor edits, Casino Royale (1967 film) and Mata Hari

[edit]

Please read WP:BRD. When one of your Bold edits is Reverted, you Discuss, not re-edit. Please go to the relevant article talk pages to discuss these matters.

Please do not mark your edits "minor" when they clearly are not.

You've added speculation, original research and unsourced claims to Casino Royale (1967 film) and Mata Hari. The editors who've reverted you have explained in their edit summaries why they acted accordingly. - Fantr (talk) 00:18, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nocturna: Granddaughter of Dracula, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page House of Frankenstein (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) 19:23, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

The Guns of Will Sonnett (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to The Fugitive
Tor Johnson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Lobo

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:36, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! SarahStierch (talk) 18:42, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Teahouse logo
Hello! Abbythecat, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!


[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

I'm So Lonesome I Could Cry (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to The Virginian
The Virginian (TV series) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Decision

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:32, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at AfC Jack grinnage (August 2)

[edit]
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Lugia2453 (talk) 21:53, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at AfC Jack grinnage (August 4)

[edit]
Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Tazerdadog (talk) 09:07, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Billy Jack, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MASH (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) 14:17, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 2013

[edit]

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did to Davy Jones (musician), without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Mlpearc (open channel) 02:18, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Davy Jones

[edit]

Abby - I've gone through your edits on Davy Jones and I have to say I agree with him. The problem is that you are inserting seeminly opinion or WP:NOR into articles that are already rife with unreferenced garbage. This is not to say that I disagree with your statement that the Davy Jones discography would be better with these edits. So let me copy in one of your reverted edits and go over a couple things so you understand where the problem lies so that YOU can improve your edits.

So on this page (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Davy_Jones_(musician)&diff=prev&oldid=588313467) we see several edits that User:Mlpearc reverted. Almost all of them including "The version heard in the movie "Star Spangled Girl" is different" and "In all, Jones recorded 22 non-Monkees singles between 1965-1981" make me say How do you know this? when I see them. What book/magazine article/TV interview/etc did you glean this information from. So your inserted info appears to be original research to an experienced Wiki editor. You need to insert a reference after this sentence to corroborate your inserted statement.

It now appears that you've added back in all that information. So you have a couple options. 1) you need to quickly go in and add references to ALL the added information you've put into the article (I can help you with referencing if the links Mlpearc has given you aren't enough) or 2) "YOU" can revert them now and add the material back little by little with ref's. Because to be honest with you, I'm about to revert the info myself, but will hold off and allow you to correct your own material as a learning opportunity for you. I know it's somewhat tedious to put stuff on Wiki this way, but its the same process I went through years ago when I started editting Wiki as I also didn't understand that in order to be a respected, encyclopedic source, Wiki needs to be independently verifiable. So no one is saying "you can't edit this page/Wikipedia" - we are just saying that if you want to add information correctly, that is verifiable and that will stand the test of the scrutiny of future editors, you need to include references to the edits you make (edit comments would help too - and more than just "notes" - until the other editors can trust that you are doing your editing correctly). Please reply here on your talk page and we can go over what I've said if you are interested. Ckruschke (talk) 18:42, 31 December 2013 (UTC)Ckruschke[reply]

all sounds good. I sometimes get exasperated by Wiki too - you just have to keep it all in the right mindset. At the end of the day, does Whats on Wiki really matter? Thats kind of what I kepp telling myself when I run up against someone who acts like a jerk. Ckruschke (talk) 02:43, 2 January 2014 (UTC)Ckruschke[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jack grinnage concern

[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jack grinnage, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 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) 02:01, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jack grinnage

[edit]

Hello Abbythecat. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Jack grinnage".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jack grinnage}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 08:01, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Danny Thomas Show, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Jose Jimenez and Bill Dana. 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) 09:07, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

[edit]
Hello, Abbythecat. You have new messages at Deadbeef's talk page.
Message added 05:59, 7 January 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Deadbeef 05:59, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited I Walk the Line (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hook, Line & Sinker. 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) 08:58, 19 April 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) 14:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Guns of Will Sonnett, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Branded. 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) 09:07, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

List of Playboy videos
added a link pointing to Wendy Hamilton
The Guns of Will Sonnett
added a link pointing to The Fugitive

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

[edit]

Hello, Abbythecat. 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)[reply]

Hey, Hey, It's the Monkees

[edit]

Abbythecat, I am requesting that you revert your recent edit to the "Hey, Hey, It's the Monkees" entry and cease this petty edit war you are fostering. For my part, I will make no further changes to the page; rather, I will report your conduct if the page is not reverted soon, or if you make any further edits that undermine properly referenced material. --Sm5574 (talk) 02:42, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the dispute resolution is that I request you respond to my post on the article talk page. Please do so. --Sm5574 (talk) 19:35, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Email

[edit]

What email address do you have registered with Wikipedia? That is the email address to which the email was sent. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:22, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What email address has Sm5574 been sending email to? What email address has the threatening email been sent to? Robert McClenon (talk) 06:22, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You refer to Sm5574 making statements that they work for Wikipedia. Have they made those statements on-wiki, and, if so, where, or by email? Robert McClenon (talk) 06:22, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to me that both you and Sm5574 have been editing in a way that is less than desirable. I will look in more detail shortly. It appears that Sm5574 is correct that you have been removing sourced content without discussing. It does appear that they are being demanding and rude, but that they are trying to ask to have Wikipedia policies and guidelines followed. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:22, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What email address have you registered? What email address have you received email from Sm5574 at? What email address did you receive the anonymous email at? Robert McClenon (talk) 06:22, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Abbythecat (talk) 06:35, 27 August 2017 (UTC)I'm certainly not giving my e-mail address here. I am going to 'be bold' and delete Sm5574's incorrect contributions. If you object, feel free to restore them. Then I'm done with this. I do not like rude messages, and I will certainly contact the proper authorities if I get another threatening e-mail. Thank you. Abbythecat (talk) 06:35, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

[edit]

Please stop making disruptive edits, as you did at Hey, Hey, It's the Monkees.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Power~enwiki (talk) 07:03, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Monkees Dispute

[edit]

It is clear that you are very distraught about the content dispute about the Monkees. However, after looking at it, I still have no idea what the problem is. I can see that you have made some edits that were not adequately sourced and have removed some content with which you disagreed, but it is otherwise very hard to understand what the issues are. Please stop making disruptive or disputed edits, because it is a way to get blocked. Please stop saying that other editors are bullying or threatening you unless we can see where and what the problem is. (If you have received any emails that contain threats, simply report them immediately to the local or national police. Do not waste your time complaining here about threats that we cannot see.) Please explain what the issues are. If you need advice, you may ask for advice at the Teahouse. Please go to the talk page and discuss your proposed bold edits before making any bold edits. We can't help you if you won't say clearly what the problem is. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:42, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am troubled by the statements that you have been making about the Monkees dispute. I see that there has been a content dispute. However, you have made some statements that are not backed up by what I can see. You complain that User:Sm5574 says that they work for Wikipedia. I can't find any claim to that effect. You refer to some emails that you have received. However, you also said that you couldn't find an email that I sent you. Either you are inventing some of the emails, or you have a great deal of confusion about your email addresses. If the latter is true, get someone to help you, rather than just crying on Wikipedia. You say that Wikipedia owes you some sort of support after seven years, and I don't know what you think the problem is, but I can see that your start with Wikipedia seven years ago was not a favorable one, and that you started off by making disruptive edits for which you were blocked, so I don't think that you should try arguing that Wikipedia owes you support without explaining how. Also, I am very skeptical of your claim to have received threatening emails, because you say that you won't report them to the local or national police if they don't continue. I have probably already wasted my time and yours. At this point, unfortunately, it appears that you are the one who is being the problematic editor. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:35, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please, Don't Take Edits Personally

[edit]

Remember that no one here knows you. No one here should particularly care why you are making a certain edit. The purpose of Wikipedia is to be a quality repository of information. If someone comes along with additional information (which may, from time to time, refute yours), or if someone believes your information is not up to the standards of Wikipedia, or if someone simply thinks there is a better way to express your information -- none of that is a reflection on you. It's all about the information; it's all about Wikipedia. I have had many changes reverted, others reworded so many times they became unrecognizable. I will not pretend that I was happy about all that, and I won't say that I have always handled it appropriately, but at the end of the day, it isn't about me. I have to accept that fact if I'm going to be part of Wikipedia. If we work to the best of our ability and follow Wikipedia guidelines, then we have done our part. Who knows which edits will be the one that may help someone along the way?--Sm5574 (talk) 01:16, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To that end, embrace collaboration. Embrace interaction with others. Embrace the Talk page. There are ways to contribute beyond making all the changes yourself. And if you have any concerns or questions about why certain actions have been taken on an article, again, discuss it on the Talk page. That's what it's there for.--Sm5574 (talk) 01:16, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Most importantly, I repeat, don't take the edits personally. No one here is concerned about how good an editor you are. It's only about you if you make it about you. Same goes for the rest of us. We may be very aware of and concerned about our own egos, but no one else is. Everyone else is concerned about the content. When we understand that and work with it, then Wikipedia becomes better, and I believe we become better, as well.--Sm5574 (talk) 01:16, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Abbythecat (talk) 02:21, 31 August 2017 (UTC)Thank you. I'll try to delete the pity party parts of my posting. Again, sorry. Abbythecat (talk) 02:21, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, Abbythecat. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Foy Van Dolsen for deletion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Foy Van Dolsen 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/Foy Van Dolsen 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 notice from the top of the article. Calton | Talk 04:45, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, Abbythecat. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, Abbythecat. 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]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fractured Flickers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sebastian Cabot. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 05:58, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mammoth Studios for deletion

[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mammoth Studios 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/Mammoth Studios until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Rorshacma (talk) 16:06, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Abbythecat&oldid=1202369159"