User talk:Tommy Pinball

Welcome!

Hello, Tommy Pinball, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Tommy Pinball. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Theopolisme _TALK 20:17, 9 August 2012 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Wiki-work

Hi tommy, you can email me to discuss what you need. Rich Farmbrough, 20:44, 9 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]

No sign of the email.... Rich Farmbrough, 17:44, 11 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
17:44, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Wiki-work

I'd also like to assist if possible - I have some time on my hands. :) As Rich said, feel free to send me an email - I would be more than happy to help! Theopolisme _TALK 20:59, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would also be interested in assisting, depending on what you need done. My email link is enabled, or drop a msg on my talk page. DES ^(talk) 00:38, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Tommy Pinball. You have new messages at Theopolisme's talk page.
Message added 22:54, 13 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Theopolisme _TALK 22:54, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. When you recently edited The New Machiavelli, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Discursive (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) 04:53, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of "Gray, Samuel"

A page you created, Gray, Samuel, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it redirects from an implausible misspelling.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 17:32, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Exchequer and Audit Departments Act 1866 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to National Audit Office

Public Accounts Committee (United Kingdom) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to National Audit Office

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:22, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please fill out our brief Teahouse guest survey

Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback! We have created a brief survey meant to help us better understand the experience of new editors on Wikipedia. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests pages sometime in the last few months.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

Jonathan and Sarah, Teahouse hosts 02:23, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Evangelical Presbyterian Church in England and Wales, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Barry (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) 12:00, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Magnolia × soulangeana, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cup-and-saucer (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) 12:28, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited My Life for Ireland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charles John (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) 09:41, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Dunboyne (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Trim

Mauser (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mannlicher

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:04, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Falah Hassan al-Naqib (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Salahuddin

Mohammad Bahr al-Ulloum (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Salahuddin

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of user conduct discussion

You may wish to comment on a user conduct discussion regarding Paul Bedson, which can be found here. If you comment there you may wish to review the rules for user conduct comments first. You are receiving this notification because you commented at one of the articles or AfDs that are cited in the discussion. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:05, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeovilton & Cam Brook

Hi, Thanks for all your edits related to Cam Brook, however I reverted the edit to Yeovilton as the Cam Brook which you are linking is nowhere near Yeovilton & as I put in my edit summary this must be another Cam (which doesn't have an article yet). I note you put the link back with no explanation that I could see.— Rod ^talk 20:53, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've found it now River Cam (Somerset) & article changed.— Rod ^talk 21:00, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It can be confusing - I've had to get my head around the River Yeos in Somerset.— Rod ^talk 21:07, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Astor family, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MP (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, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gleysols, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page LDH (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) 09:46, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

sawbill

I'm shortly going to modify your edit to Red-breasted Merganser, but I thought I should explain why so you don't think it's edit-warring. Unless your OED says something different to my Chambers, a "sawbill" is a merganser, a group of duck species, not a particular species, see also this and this Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:01, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I've upset you, your original edit was obviously GF, so I didn't think Twinkle was appropriate, and GF but in correct edits like yours are often drive-bys that are never revisited Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:09, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Baxter (name), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Baxter (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) 21:35, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:E J Saunderson.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:E J Saunderson.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. eh bien mon prince (talk) 03:36, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2010 Flash Crash, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Harris (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) 02:09, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of 1793, an Act of Parliament for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1793, an Act of Parliament is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1793, an Act of Parliament until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.Richard Harvey (talk) 19:09, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing rude

Please allow an engineer to explain to you how it works, reminding you not to blindly revert, and to use technical-academic literature as refs, or for instance army field manuals, or demolition ref handbooks of old days, where these obsolete explosives are still explained in detail. I believe the "Nitro-Gelatin" is already mentioned in a book of 1898, which I read. 70.137.141.81 (talk) 09:01, 14 July 2013 (UTC) 70.137.141.81 (talk) 09:01, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Asian hornets

Hello, I hope you don't mind but I changed the redirect to point to the several asian hornet/wasps. Widefox; talk 15:21, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Arno Karlen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bb (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) 11:22, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Heterosubtypic immunity, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page HSI (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) 11:57, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Tommy, you are edit warring now; two different users have reverted you; that's a sign that you need to go to the discussion board, per WP:BRD. Please revert your changes, or I will report you to the edit warring board and you will likely end up being blocked. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 14:30, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at NDE shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Tommy_Pinball reported by User:Obiwankenobi (Result: ). Thank you. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 17:14, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Moving/Renaming pages

Hello, Tommy Pinball. Bkonrad (aka Older ≠ wiser) mentioned this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation, but it may have gotten lost in the specific discussion of NDE. In order to request that a page me renamed or moved (different labels for the same process), you can initiate a discussion on the article's talk page. Wikipedia:Requested moves describes the process. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 02:17, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I might add to this that the answer you gave a new user at the Teahouse regarding moving a page (in this case, from AfC to mainspace) was entirely incorrect. Cutting and pasting is never the proper way to move a page, as that does not keep its history intact. Since everything here is under CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and GFDL, that makes a page moved by cut and paste a copyright violation. Even though they are available to reuse, Wikipedia articles are, after a fashion, copyrighted in that to freely use them, they must be attributed. Without the edit history, the creators of the article are not getting attribution.

Do you think you helped the new user at the Teahouse by giving her incorrect information? I am at a loss as to why you are there answering questions you do not know the answer to. The purpose of the Teahouse is to welcome and help new users. You are not a new user, but you apparently are not qualified to be a Teahouse host either. There is no shame in not knowing an answer, Tommy. However it is not helpful to confuse new editors by giving them wrong answers. John from Idegon (talk) 10:36, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand.

I'm a disinterested editor echoing a complaint about behavior that strikes me as patently uncivil. I didn't raise the issue at ANI, and - as I have said a couple of times - I'm not sure it really warrants attention there at all. I am content to let the process run, or not. Why are you making this personal against me? Digging up an edit summary of mine, reverting a vandal in 2007. My goodness. JohnInDC (talk) 17:53, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help at mark's Talk page. JohnInDC (talk) 13:40, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't detect any meaningful improvement here at all. The fellow is very unpleasant, bordering on toxic, and I'm inclined to raise the issue with other editors again to see if he can't be brought to heel just a little bit. Your thoughts? Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 19:55, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note - I'll let you know if I post something somewhere. Happy fellow! JohnInDC (talk) 23:28, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Added another plea on his Talk page. Either he'll shape up or there will be a clear record of failed measured attempts to induce him to do it! JohnInDC (talk) 00:34, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we should be grateful that he has been confining himself to the edit summaries: Link. JohnInDC (talk) 13:02, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2010 UK quango reforms, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BIS (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) 09:11, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Witch-hunt

Some people dont have a sense of humour and may find this offensive, in this case a witch-hunt may happen at your expense, at which point they will build a bridge out of you. By the way thanks for your reverting. Murry1975 (talk) 18:23, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Hill movie

Whoops, don't even know what happened there, heh. Corabal (talk) 20:23, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Errors on 24 April

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Cyril Ornadel page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:40, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited At-Taghabun, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charity (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) 08:57, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Tommy Pinball. You have new messages at LittleWink's talk page.
Message added 20:04, 6 May 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

~~LittleWink (talk) 20:04, 6 May 2014 (UTC)~~[reply]
LittleWink (talk) 17:00, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sammy

Your edit seemed like vandalism hence that I reverted it. I cannot find the observer article as well and how sammy is used in context. Also I do not see what Sammy will add to the article instead of calling him just Bin Laden. We can take it to the talk page too see if consensus can be gained. NathanWubs (talk) 21:30, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notification

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:29, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 2014

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for vandalism and personal attacks. 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. Bishonen | talk 22:35, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Tommy Pinball (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have no defence against a block for personal attacks, but I have not engaged in Vandalism: any addition, removal, or change of content, in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. I request that the reasons for the block be amended to remove Vanadalism and the appropriate sanction for the personal attack be applied Tommy Pinball (talk) 22:48, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Unlike the American court system, we don't acquit due to technicalities. As you at least admit the personal attacks, there may be some hope yet. As for removing "vandalism" in your block log, that is technically impossible for any admin to do, so I haven't tried to determine if there is merit to that request. I am declining the unblock request as I don't see you presenting a clear path forward nor providing assurances the behavior won't be repeated. You are concerned about the details of the block rather than the reasons it was necessary. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 23:45, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

.

An uninvolved admin will review your unblock request, but I believe my recent warning that you removed made it clear what I meant by vandalism: your pasting AndyTheGrump's warning back on his own page. You repeated the same action with my own warning, hence the block for vandalism. You think the personal attack (there were links for all this stuff, again, in my warning) is all you've done wrong? No. I'll amend the block reason to read "disruptive editing" in place of "vandalism" if you like, since it's true that content wasn't involved. Well, content wasn't involved provided I AGF that the "Sammy" business at Osama bin Laden wasn't a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia, which is a bit of a stretch. 48 hours is pretty lenient in any case. Don't remove this comment, please, as it contains information for the reviewing admin. Bishonen | talk 23:02, 15 May 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Hey, I don't want to cancel your ego trip; if that means "Disruptive editing"...go for it, I'm just hoping that Due process operates and the vandal accusation is amended . Tommy Pinball (talk) 23:17, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, if you'd like due process, you might as well wait for the reviewing admin, because that is due process where blocks are concerned. I freely offered to amend the block reason merely to cheer you up, because I know being blocked is a cheerless business. If it's possible for you to indicate whether you wish me to do that or not in a single civil straightforward non-roundabout sentence, I'm still willing to. If not, wait and see if anybody else will respond well to your request. Bishonen | talk 23:48, 15 May 2014 (UTC).[reply]

I would like to believe a block log represents a true and fair record of reasons and sanctions. If no one gives a toss about that sort of thing, then I don't either. Tommy Pinball (talk) 23:54, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I might add that there is no justice at Wikipedia. We might throw around legal terms, tongue in cheek or simply because they are easy to understand, but we are not a court. It isn't about justice, it is about building an encyclopedia built on neutrality and verifiable facts. And block logs are approximations of a situation at best, the history of talk pages is more important. In the larger scheme, the blog log pales in comparison to your actual deeds. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 23:56, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TLDNR Tommy Pinball (talk) 00:13, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if you mean my one paragraph, or that 2/3rds of a page essay, but both are significantly shorter than most articles. If that is too long, then this might not be the right hobby for you. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 01:03, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, block logs just record a history of blocks, generally with a concise reason attached. That reason is not used as the sole reason for subsequent evaluations of an editor. There is no preclusive effect either. The block at issue here was simply for disruption in the end, and in that vein was rightly issued. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 01:39, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Daniel Thomas (Welsh footballer) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Daniel Thomas (Welsh footballer) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Thomas (Welsh footballer) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Zanoni (talk) 14:13, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Cam Valley for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cam Valley is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cam Valley until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:12, 26 January 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) 16:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Progenitors listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Progenitors. Since you had some involvement with the Progenitors redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. —Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 06:13, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

VIRGIL listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect VIRGIL. Since you had some involvement with the VIRGIL redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. The Traditionalist (talk) 12:58, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Lithic scatters

Hello Tommy Pinball,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Lithic scatters for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons. For more details please see the notice on the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, 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.

TheSandDoctor (talk) 05:01, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Cardiff Civil Service" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect "Cardiff Civil Service". Since you had some involvement with the "Cardiff Civil Service" redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — PinkAmpers &^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 22:08, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ragnar Löfstedt for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ragnar Löfstedt is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ragnar Löfstedt until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Zubin12 (talk) 08:57, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"GRAND ILLUSION (1938)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect GRAND ILLUSION (1938). Since you had some involvement with the GRAND ILLUSION (1938) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:16, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (1962)" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (1962). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 19#LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (1962) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Dominicmgm (talk) 22:45, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]