I'm writing an article in my userspace and would like your thoughts before I move it to mainspace. My first question is, if it was in the article namespace, do you think it would be deleted? (Or, would you delete it if you saw it?) It's been created twice by other users before, and both times it's been speedily deleted due to lack of notability. I've tried asserting its notability this time--have I done it well enough? My other question is, how can the article be improved?
Once again it is festive season, a time where festive decorations are displayed and gifts are swapped; but what about the true meaning of christmas? The true meaning of christmas is about the fight for freedom and how in times of hardship and misery, one person leads their people to freedom as a great warrior; for those who fight for a cause are warriors and those who fight for a worthy cause are great warriors. Such an act earns respect and honour; but most importantly, brings happiness to their people. So to achieve this as happiness lies in other people's happiness and greatness lies in how you deal with little people, we selflessly think of others in the hope that they will be happy this christmas.
Hi! I was recently accused of linkspamming by a user called history2007. Anyone that will check this manually will see that I linked every single wiki article to the specific topic on the site called catholicrevelations.com I was reading on where I found the different works. They say that "it seems that it's linkspamming." IT SEEMS? I read the wiki rules carefully before I started adding info and yet the user Beetstra removed my additions without even checking the pages I linked to. Anyone that will take the time to watch them can verify that I am following wiki rules. I am swedish so I hope my english is understandable. I hope you can help me and resolve this situation so I can continue adding relevant info without being called "linkspammer." Thank you. Humilityisfine (talk) 02:16, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was looking through the coaches at Wikipedia:Admin_coaching/Status and saw that your entry was commented out. I have moved it to the "Reconfirmation" section.
Could you let me know if you are still interesting in being involved with Admin Coaching, or if you would prefer to have your name removed from the "reconfirmation" list and placed on the "retired" list. If you want to be involved, could you please move your entry from "Reconfirmation" to "Active" and indicate how many students you would be willing to have (obviously, if you are actively coaching at the moment, then please indicate this!)
If I do not hear from you within a week, I will assume that you would like to have your name removed from the list of coaches and moved to the retired list.
WikiProject Good Articles will be running a GAN backlog elimination drive for the entire month of April. The goal of this drive is to bring the number of outstanding Good Article nominations down to below 200. This will help editors in restoring confidence to the GAN process as well as actively improving, polishing, and rewarding good content. If you are interested in participating in the drive, please place your name here. Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. Hope we can see you in April.
User:Headbomb is inserting the template, despite it not conforming to current policy. Neutronium is one hypothetically proposed name of element zero. Currently, the IUPAC does not recognise element zero to formally exist, since the IUPAC is the rulling authority on such matters - neither does the majority of the scientific community recognise it either. Yet Headbomb insists that Wikipedia acknowledges it as such by introducing this template. This template only contains information that pertains to the neutron. I perceive that Headbomb is attempting to present an opinion as fact, which is against Wikipedia policy, the sole existance of the template proves it so. Several user has in the articles history attempted to remove the infobox with the same result each time.--Plasmic Physics (talk) 23:14, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ahem. 75.21.98.98 happens to have been a fluctuating IP address assigned to me. I have no control over that, my provider does that automatically. So whatever vandalsim etc. you refer to has probably been made to look like the abovenamed IP address, but isn't it. I don't do that kind of thing, but others here do. Just wanted you to know. Of course, if you want my private opinion splattered here, I think this is a cheap lure to get me to expose yet another Ip address. OK, well, I got a million of them and only God can find me.75.21.122.138 (talk) 05:59, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative privileges of users who have been inactive for one year, meaning administrators who have made neither any edits nor any logged actions in over one year. As a result of this discussion, your administrative privileges have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these privileges reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. RL0919 (talk) 21:46, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
