User talk:BCST2001

RM and JW and WP:UNDUE

Undue weight has to be evaluated in an article specific context, because due weight for an incident involving multiple people has to be evaluated in comparison to the other events of their lives - and those events will not be the same for both people. Posting identical conversations to the talk pages of both articles is not truly discussing undue weight. Please stop this pattern of behavior, it disrupts attempts to actually address any legitimate concerns that you or other editors might raise. GRBerry 21:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pedant17

I've left a note on Pedant17's talk page about his repetitive edits to Friedrich Nietzsche. I thought I'd give you a heads-up. RJC ^{Talk Contribs} 00:42, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a follow-up courtesy, I thought I should tell you that, because of Pedant17's recent activity, I have opened an RfC regarding him at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Pedant17. I don't mean to drag you into this or to suggest that you must participate in any way. RJC ^{Talk Contribs} 08:12, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Elephant

Glad to have amused. Out of curiosity's sake, what's the page it was referenced from? john k (talk) 15:10, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clay Aiken

CNN has confirmed that Aiken is out, asserting it will appear in this weekend's People. I added the cited source to the "Personal life" section of the article, but I didn't see the protection was put in place due to an edit conflict. Let me know if you have any concerns. caknuck _° is geared up for football season 00:17, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Jackson

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Please note the BLP exception to 3rr does not apply to dead people --Weetoddid (talk) 22:17, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Movies on TV

The article Movies on TV has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable publication

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 20:40, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barry Fitzgerald

Hi there, I saw this edit to Barry Fitzgerald (Australian rules footballer) where you state that he was born in Adelaide. I'm not doubting you, but could you please provide a reference for this so he can then be categorised in Category:Australian rules footballers from South Australia? Also, as he was recruited from a team in New South Wales, if he spent a significant amount of his childhood in NSW then he would also fall under Category:Australian rules footballers from New South Wales. Any help would be appreciated. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 23:43, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok then, thanks for explaining. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 03:20, 30 January 2011 (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) 17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]