Hello Also, octopuses! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! +A.0u02:35, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop adding prod tags the way you are. You are not respecting our processes (such as the one where you added it to a foreign language article already listed at Pages needed translation. Also, the way you are inserting them in the middle of articles is improper. Since you're brand new here, take some time to get a feel for the place before you start trying to delete stuff, otherwise someone might think you're trying to vandalize. Thanks. 23:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Not a problem. I just went through all you edits, rolled back the inappropriate tags, but I must tell you, you did make some good calls. Your heart is in the right place in wanting to help clean up things around here, you just need a little direction. First off, and though I personally disagree with this, all radio stations are generally considered notable, so they aren't generally a candidate for deletion. However, many of the ones you tagged desperately need bringing up to our standards. If this is something you'd want to help with, let me know and I'll give you some general pointers as to what needs to be done. As far as the Lists you tagged, many of them really were crap, and qualified to be speedy deleted (which I've done). Rather than prods, they should have had CSD tags. If you come across more mostly-empty lists, or articles, you might want to read about how to put the speedy tag on, at WP:CSD.
I don't want you to get the impression I'm trying to squash your energy or enthusiasm. Wikipedia, unfortunately, contains many "crap" articles, and someone like you with an eye for finding them can really help clean this place up. Thanks for your efforts! AKRadecki00:14, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know. I will read up on the other tags and try to be more cautious in the future. I appreciate your taking the time to offer me assistance. Also, octopuses14:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for persistent vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Mexican standoff. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Carlosguitar16:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia articles, such as those you made to Aquatic ape hypothesis, even if your ultimate intention is to fix them. Such edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you.
You have been indefblocked for your vandalism (either it's a vandalism account, or a compromised account.. makes no difference either way) SirFozzie (talk) 00:46, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Mexican standoff. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Carlosguitar 16:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia articles, such as those you made to Aquatic ape hypothesis, even if your ultimate intention is to fix them. Such edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you.