User talk:FreeatlastChitchat

This is my talk page, aka my home. I will try to keep it clutter free, and you should keep it free of verbal abuse. Thank you very much. If we have an ongoing conversation it will be here. If you want to see my recent conversations use the history. Thank you and have a good day.

DYK nomination of Lahore church bombings

Hello! Your submission of Lahore church bombings at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 06:56, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

@ OccultZone I read your review. Thank you very very much for it. Care to advise me on how to edit the article? Should I rephrase or just put in a quotation? FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 07:31, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Rephrase the quotation if it is too big compared to the rest of the section, unless your section exceeded 500 words, then maybe it would've been better to keep the whole quotation. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:36, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

@ OccultZone. I redid reference 51 and changed "said" to claimed in the lynching section. Also added another ref. I hope it is ok now.FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 07:47, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Good Luck! Loved & Beloved (talk) 12:55, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy delete declined

Free, I declined your speedy nomination at Ashmont Hill. Charting on several Billboard charts is a clear claim of significance. In fact, in this case, this article would probably be kept at articles for deletion. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:40, 3 May 2015 (UTC) @Oiyarbepsy kk. Ty for heads up. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 04:46, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Editing at Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 15:00, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Discussion on Talk Page of Ant & Dec

Hi FreeatlastChitchat,

I see you have edited Ant & Dec previously, there is a discussion on the Talk Page regarding the main image, i.e. which image best shows the two. Please leave your comments...SethWhales ^talk

TW

Just so you know, you can log the CSD taggings you perform with twinkle, enable "Keep a log in userspace of all CSD nominations" here: WP:TW/P --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 17:29, 4 May 2015 (UTC) Thanks man. Appreciate the help.FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 02:45, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Surin Elephant Round-up

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:55, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring, and for other disruptive editing, including misrepresentation of sources and misrepresentation of what your own edits are doing. For example, in the edit summarry to this edit, you wrote "putting in a neutral tone", but no reasonable person could possibly view what you wrote as neutral. ("A neutral tone" does not mean "a tone which strongly indicates a view which I believe is the right view".) Also, you gave no source whatever to support the claim you made in that edit, despite repeatedly removing other editors' contributions on the ground that you think their sources are inadequate. Again, in the edit summary to this edit you wrote "No mention of rape jihad Anywhere in the sources given", despite the fact that the exact words "Rape Jihad" feature both in the title of one of the sources and in the body of its text. Please note that this block is not based on any judgement or opinion regarding your views on the content of the article: it is based on the methods you have been using. Edit warring, misrepresentation, and other disruptive practices are unacceptable, no matter how justifiable or unjustifiable are the ends that those practices are used to achieve. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:31, 9 May 2015 (UTC)