User talk:StandfordFoster

January 2024

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with David Louton. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. RetroCosmos ^talk 03:31, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This man is prominent enough for an article, but did most of the research in a pre digital era. We are, however, working on finding more sources. Wikipedia should not only rely on online sources; the internet has only existed for 0.05% of human history. StandfordFoster (talk) 03:43, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at John M. Walker Jr., you may be blocked from editing. Smallangryplanet (talk) 13:18, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many people have accidents every day and are killed. This may be in the news but does not warrant inclusion in Wikipedia. If you disagree as a more senior editor, I will give you the right to revert the changes StandfordFoster (talk) 13:20, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Pin134 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pin134. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]