User talk:JamesMaqsood

Sexualpenetration[edit]

A tag has been placed on Sexualpenetration, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing no content to the reader. Please note that external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article don't count as content. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 15:20, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sexualpenetration[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Sexualpenetration, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Duplicate article. See Sexual Penetration

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. -- smurdah^{[citation needed]} 18:18, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfD nomination of Sexualpenetration[edit]

I have nominated Sexualpenetration (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. -- smurdah^{[citation needed]} 19:16, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Sexual penetration, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. -- smurdah^{[citation needed]} 19:17, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Maqsood Ahmed Soomro[edit]

A tag has been placed on Maqsood Ahmed Soomro 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 a person or group of people, 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:19, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

February 2014[edit]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Responsive web design. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:55, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Responsive web design with this edit. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 12:21, 10 February 2014 (UTC) [1][reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. 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 adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:25, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

March 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm Apparition11. I noticed that you made a change to an article, PeoplePerHour, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 13:48, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Jonathan Ive. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 16:59, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Jonathan Ive, you may be blocked from editing. Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 16:59, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, as you did at Scott Forstall, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 17:08, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Plus, I would be extremely interested to hear how Scott Forstall started his career in 1992 with a company that wasn't established until 1996... Apparition¹¹ ^Complaints/Mistakes 17:12, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[http:spam.standardmarketingltd.co.uk]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:13, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]