User talk:MandalayVA

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here! Job E 6 23:47, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Roethlisberger

Thanks for the additional clean up :) :p --►ShadowJester07 18:44, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Missy Peregrym / Ben Roethlisberger

Hi. I'm not sure the claim of a romantic link between the Roethlisberger and Peregrym is good content to include in the articles. The source that you've cited merely hints at a connection, and relies on the reader to draw the conclusion. This is not a reliable source. Even if there was a good source, I think that the guidelines in Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons would indicate that a removal was in order. Particularly: "An important rule of thumb when writing biographical material about living persons is "do no harm." Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid; it is not our job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. Biographies of living persons (BLP)s must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy." Please take a look at the guidelines. If you would like to have a discussion over the suitability of the content, I'd be all for it (here, or in Missy's page). I don't want to converse only through edit summaries. --GargoyleMT 21:29, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it that Roethlisberger and Natalie Gulbis were photographed together exactly ONCE, neither ever acknowledged they were dating, but she is routinely referred to as his ex-girlfriend by the media and there's a note of it here? Yet Roethlisberger and Missy Peregrym have been photographed together in at least five different cities; she has been in attendance at numerous pro-am golf tournaments in which he's participated (also noted by the media); per the link I noted in my last contribution she's let it be known that she flies out to Pittsburgh regularly and wants to be out there during the football season, but somehow they're not dating. If you look at my contribution history I am not prone to undocumented additions or gossip and I am more than willing to provide links to the photos of which I speak, all of which have been published. Per your criteria the information about Natalie Gulbis should be removed as well, since there is far less evidence of a relationship between her and Roethlisberger and the source providing the information claims it was given out by Gulbis' publicist, who said that they were only "speaking on the phone" and leans far more towards "gossip and titilation" than what I've provided re: Missy. Thank you for your consideration. MandalayVA 10:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't follow Ben Roethlisberger's article, but if what you say about the other person is true, it should be removed. Feel free to take the initiative. Even if Roethlisberger said they were dating, I think that it would be removable per what I quoted above from WP:BLP. What you said about Peregrym is interesting, but ultimately, only information that is verifiable by a reliable source (that does fact checking and is responsible for its publishings) should be included in Wikipedia. There's also a prohibition against original research, which would prevent someone put all those sightings of Peregrym and Roethlisberger in the article to let readers draw their own conclusion. Your reply is enough to show you understand the issues and my concerns - I just wanted to head off more reverting should the information find its way into Peregrym's article again. Thanks for your time. --GargoyleMT 13:12, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh ...

Taking out the stuff about Missy Peregrym isn't going to change the fact that he's dating her and she's confirmed it.

AfD nomination of I'm Not Sorry.net

I'm Not Sorry.net, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that I'm Not Sorry.net satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I'm Not Sorry.net and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of I'm Not Sorry.net during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Phgao 06:00, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsay Lohan and the RfC

There is an ongoing RfC on Talk:Lindsay Lohan about Samantha Ronson. It is inappropriate to re-add the disputed material before consensus is reached. Please discuss on the talk page rather than continuing to revert. Also please read WP:3RR. Thank you. Ward3001 (talk) 23:42, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Richmond, Virginia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page UPS (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) 10:35, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, MandalayVA. 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]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, MandalayVA. 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, MandalayVA. 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]