User talk:Breeet

Speedy deletion of Brett Layden

{{hangon}} I don't think Brett should be deleted.

A tag has been placed on Brett Layden requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Onorem ♠Dil 12:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

March 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Cat has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Boracay Bill (talk) 08:13, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Vandalism. Your edits have been automatically marked as unconstructive/possible vandalism and have been automatically reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Vandalism was changed by Breeet (u) (t) replacing entire content with something else on 2009-03-16T08:28:12+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 08:28, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to the lemma of Eduard Buchner. That was pure vandalism. --DrJunge (talk) 14:55, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A further case of vandalism at [1]. Your behaviour will be reported. --DrJunge (talk) 14:58, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]