User talk:Bilbobagginsesprecious

Hullo!

Bilbobagginsesprecious, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Bilbobagginsesprecious! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! TheOriginalSoni (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:15, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of James McCarthy (author)

Hello Bilbobagginsesprecious,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged James McCarthy (author) for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. Take a look at our suggestions for essential content in short articles to learn what should be included.

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. Thanks, BlueRoll18 (talk) 06:24, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Law of One

Thanks for your recent work on The Law of One. Hopefully now they won't be able to delete it again. ChakaKong^talk 22:33, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Law of One, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mayan (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) 11:07, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your feedback

If you are talking about The Law of One, it is still at the discussion stage, and nothing has been decided yet. And please assume good faith, even with admins.

Lectonar (talk) 14:26, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And if you are talking about James McCarthy (author), well you blanked that one yourself, and is has duly been deleted. Cheers. Lectonar (talk) 14:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Normally, I am much faster in responding, but was out to lunch ;). I kind of specialize in the sad and confused feedbacks, and try to provide a service here, even though it goes unnoticed most of the time (and unpayed, but that all the time ). And if you stay around for a bit, say about 5 years or more, you will find that the rules here are, well, a synthesis of Wikipedias history, very much like a tree which has been growing and getting stronger. Thanks for the compliment, btw, much appreciated. Just a little advice from an old coot: stay around for a bit, and learn the ropes. It can be very fulfilling. Lectonar (talk) 14:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to say...

I just want to say I am sorry for stirring up a controversy through The Law of One. --Neoconfederate (talk) 19:55, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And thank you for your work. --Neoconfederate (talk) 19:57, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

no the precious is mine! you hear mine!

File:Gollum.PNG

We will not let you have its! filthy Hobbitses!--Lerdthenerd wiki defender 20:00, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion on The Law of One

What do you find inaccurate about its content? Your opinion would mean a lot to me. --Neoconfederate (talk) 02:26, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

there are good things and bad things. I think a lot of it is fantasy and a lot of it is overly vague symbolism. I think there are interesting ideas but on the whole they lack the subtlety of a more useful philosophy, worldview, or more developed spirituality. Most of the followers are in awe of the content and worship it blindly, essentially taken it as a sacred infallible text which is also a very unappealing attribute of it.Bilbobagginsesprecious (talk) 11:28, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

High five. Goldfringer (talk) 11:43, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Testing

Bilbo Baggins' Precious ( § ) 23:08, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bilbo Baggins' Precious ( § ) 23:11, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bilbo Baggins' Precious ( § ) 07:26, 30 January 2014 (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) 16:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]