User talk:Radicalaccuracy

December 2015

Hello, I'm Apokryltaros. I noticed that you made a change to an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history 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. Please provide WP:Reliable Sources to support drastic changes to the dates.--Mr Fink (talk) 15:29, 12 December 2015 (UTC) i[reply]

Ways to improve Ornithoprion

Hi, I'm Alvin the Almighty. Radicalaccuracy, thanks for creating Ornithoprion!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Expand this article.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Alvin the Almighty (talk) 13:42, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree with just one of Alvin's three tags: "Unreferenced". You must give us a source for your information - the reliable website, book or journal where you found it. But there were other problems with the article too: look at it now and see the differences. There's a lot to learn about editing Wikipedia, but it's an interesting journey. Happy Editing! PamD 14:14, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Helicoprion. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please provide reliable sources for your date-changes, or please stop making such changes.--Mr Fink (talk) 21:59, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Prehistoric wildlife

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 Prehistoric wildlife 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 web content, but it does not credibly 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Pichpich (talk) 00:45, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Megalodon time range

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.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Megalodon time range requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. 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.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. 331dot (talk) 22:34, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

December 2015

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 22:35, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

please don't take away my articles and edits, i'm getting my information from smithsonian,national geographic and prehistoric wildlife.com just to name a few.

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Nyctosaurus. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please stop altering dates in articles without reason. It is not appreciated.--Mr Fink (talk) 00:05, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Eurypterid. --Mr Fink (talk) 02:14, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks 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 first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Spencer^T♦C 03:29, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Radicalaccuracy (talk) 23:02, 19 December 2015 (UTC)please let me edit, spencer i'm sure that you will understand that i am just a kid who likes to read books. please take down the block or at least make the block shorter, i want to make an edit on december 24th.please i will do anything.[reply]

Please follow the instructions in the block notice above to appeal your block(after reading the page noted there as well). 331dot (talk) 23:03, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Megalodon. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. BoxOfChickens (talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 00:25, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Afrovenator, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. BoxOfChickens (talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 00:30, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistent disruptive editing. 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 to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Acroterion (talk) 04:54, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(Radicalaccuracy (talk) 15:55, 5 January 2016 (UTC))please unblock me acroterion, i just got unblocked, please unblock me!![reply]

You are still blocked, as he blocked you for one month. You can still edit your talk page while blocked. If you want to be unblocked, please follow the directions above. BoxOfChickens (talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 16:03, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

please unblock me, i will do anything!!!!!!!!

unblock me! the tyrannosaurus is cool, but you will let me edit the article because it has one error. can you please tell me your thoughts on the force awakens. life is good.

It is unlikely that anyone will unblock you until you post a properly formatted unblock request. Please do so per the directions above. If you will "do anything", then do that. 331dot (talk) 00:59, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Helicoprion bessonovi

Hello Radicalaccuracy,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Helicoprion bessonovi for deletion, because it appears to duplicate an existing Wikipedia article, [[{{{article}}}]].

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. BeowulfBrower (talk) 01:39, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did at Megatherium, you may be blocked from editing. --Mr Fink (talk) 22:42, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]