User talk:Islandersa

)

July 2010

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Deaths in 2010, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. freshacconci talktalk 12:00, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 13

Hi. When you recently edited Deaths in 2012, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Boston Braves (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) 11:13, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Deaths in 2013 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:47, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please dial it down a notch

"Fucktard" is not an acceptable thing to say. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:23, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 16:18, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Islandersa. 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]

Leah Adler

Notability isn't inherited. It's inappropriate to add that into her death entry. You've been reverted three times already, stop edit warring. Rusted AutoParts 16:49, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You balantantly ingnored me and other editors. One more revert and you're getting reported. Rusted AutoParts 17:26, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017

Your recent editing history at Deaths in 2007 shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:43, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that this editor had already passed three reverts in 24 hours before this notice was issued, when deciding on next course of action if necessary. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 04:45, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used mainly for for disruptive editing against explicit instructions to discuss first, as you did at Deaths in 2017. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. MilborneOne (talk) 19:21, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]