User talk:Calm123

Welcome!

Hello, Calm123, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Mushroom (Talk) 12:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Renaissance New York Times Square Hotel

A tag has been placed on Renaissance New York Times Square Hotel requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's 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. AngelOfSadness talk 22:30, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Whitehousemuseum.org

A tag has been placed on Whitehousemuseum.org 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 web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles 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 web content.

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. Nuttah (talk) 16:15, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Secret Access: Air Force One

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Secret Access: Air Force One, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Single TV programme. Less an article than a DVD advert.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. CalendarWatcher (talk) 16:04, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The White House: Behind Closed Doors

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article The White House: Behind Closed Doors, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Single TV programme. No content, nor any reason given that differentiates this from any other time-slot filler.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. CalendarWatcher (talk) 16:06, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009

Please don't change the format of dates without good reason, as you did to Ian Curtis. Most British people and many people internationally write dates in day-month-year order, e.g., 12 December 1904. Most Americans use month-day-year order, e.g., December 12, 1904. If the article is about an American topic, use month-day-year. If it is a British or European topic, use day-month-year. If neither, leave it as originally written. Many Americans or British people take offence if an article about their country, written in their local version of English, is changed around to a version they don't use. So please do not do that.

If you have any questions about this, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Enjoy your time on Wikipedia. Thank you. JD554 (talk) 07:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Pearlstone Conference & Retreat Center

A tag has been placed on Pearlstone Conference & Retreat Center 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 an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles 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 organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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 page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 03:22, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Pearlstone Conference & Retreat Center

A tag has been placed on Pearlstone Conference & Retreat Center 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 an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles 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 organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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 page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. RaseaC (talk) 12:10, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 2009

Please stop. If you continue to introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. If you need guidance on how to create appropriate pages, try using the Article Wizard. You have sufficient information on this talk page explaining what does and does not constitute a WP article. If you can't be bothered to read it, please stop adding pages to WP. RaseaC (talk) 12:14, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I'm concerned you should have sufficient knowledge of what constitutes a good WP article if you were to read the numerous warnings other editors have left for you here. Furthermore, the conference centre page you recently created had already been deleted earlier this morning, so I'm going to assume that you were aware that it shouldn't be here. I'm going to leave the above 'level 3' warning in place which means the next time you receive a warning it should be a 'level 4', which is the last warning you receive before a block is requested. Heed the warnings others have left you, read the information and do not-recreate deleted material. Thanks, RaseaC (talk) 12:24, 1 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]

December 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, you may not know that Wikipedia has a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Using different styles throughout the encyclopedia, as you did in Jon & Kate Plus 8, makes it harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --Geniac (talk) 02:30, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your RFA

I've temporarily removed your RFA from the list of active RFA's, so i can talk to you about it first. Give me a few minutes to write a longer message. if you want it put back up after that, you certainly have that right. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Calm123,

Please take a look at WP:NOTNOW, a rather impersonal, but accurate, explanation of why I don't think your RFA has any real hope of passing (it's a generic page because, frankly, this happens a lot). You might also take a look at some other RFA's, successful and unsuccessful (I can point you to a few if you'd like) to get a better idea what's expected. There are 48,306,446 editors here, but only 851 admins; it's not a position easily gained. It looks like your heart's in the right place, but it's simply too soon.

Admin candidates generally have a lot more experience than you do right now. For some reason, a small core of RFA voters act as if they're offended by someone applying for RFA well before they're actually ready, and can be unreasonably harsh. I've removed your RFA to spare you that. If you'd like feedback on your work here so far, consider an WP:Editor review, you'll get much more useful advice.

Let me know if you have any questions, and thanks for offering to help out as an admin. We value your editing here. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:16, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I suppose I can't force you to withdraw, so if you really want to go ahead, you can revert my on hold note on your page, and re-add it to WP:RFA. Otherwise, I'd be happy to delete it for you. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:21, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Saw your message on my tak page. I'll just delete it instead of calling it an "unsuccessful" RFA; it was only on the list for a few minutes. Cheers. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:31, 13 July 2010 (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) 13:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]