User talk:Dappl
Proposed deletion of "Kopachuck Middle School"
[edit]The deletion of an article you created, Kopachuck Middle School, has been proposed for the following reason:
- Per WP:SCHOOL, middle schools should be redirects to school districts. None is stated here. No assertion of notability.
You are welcome to improve the article to meet Wikipedia's quality standards and remove the deletion notice from the article. You may also remove the notice if you disagree with the deletion, though in such cases, further discussion may take place at Articles for deletion, and the article may still be deleted if there is a consensus to do so.
Wikipedia has certain standards for inclusion that all articles must meet. Certain types of article must establish the notability of their subject by asserting its importance or significance. Additionally, since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, content inappropriate for an encyclopedia, or content that would be more suited to somewhere else (such as a directory or social networking website) is not acceptable. See What Wikipedia is not for the relevant policy. You may wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.
Thank you. Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 00:32, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
December 2008
[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Shelton High School (Washington) 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. -- IRP ☎ 01:03, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Articles for deletion/The greatest goalkeepers ever
[edit]Please remain civil during AfD discussions. People put a lot of time into their articles, and calling their work a piece of crap is not civil. It is a slap in their face and is not appropriate. I edited your comment to remove the remark, but please refrain from making such remarks in the future. --Terrillja talk 05:43, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
- Will do
--Dappl (talk) 05:50, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
June 2009
[edit]
Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User talk:IRP. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. superβεεcat 18:17, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Dear WikiProject Video games member,
You are receiving this message because you have either Category:WikiProject Video games members or {{User WPVG}} somewhere in your userspace and you have edited Wikipedia in the recent months.
The Video games project has created a member list to provide a clearer picture of its active membership.
All members have currently been placed in the "Inactive" section by default. Please remove your username from the "Inactive" listing and place it under the "Active" listing if you plan on regularly:
- Editing video game-related pages in the Article namespace
- Participating in video game-related discussions in the Project namespace (WT:VG, WP:AfD, WP:GAN, etc.)
Ideally, members are encouraged to do both, but either one meets our criteria of inclusion. Members still listed inactive at the beginning of November 2009 may be removed. You may re-add yourself to the active list at any time. Thank you for your help, and we look forward to working with you.
Unreferenced BLPs
[edit] Hello Dappl! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 87 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:
- Jeff Kelly - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 01:02, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
May 2010
[edit] Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. JNW (talk) 00:47, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. —Tommy2010 00:50, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. —Tommy2010 00:51, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
It's okay, some days are worse than others, but you cannot swear at other editors. Take a break, work out, get some food, call someone and come back later. We'll be here ;) —Tommy2010 00:53, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
October 2010
[edit] Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Shaun Alexander. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Raider Duck (talk) 05:20, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
In addition, please stop making threats about blocking users. I checked the Admin lists; your name is not there. You are no more an Admin than I am. On a more topical note: No, not every free agent is a "former player," for obvious reasons. However: When a healthy 33-year-old running back has been out of professional football for two years, with no NFL interest at all, this means that he will never play in the NFL again. It is simply not going to happen. Therefore, he is a former player, no matter how much you personally wish he was still active. Wishing for something does not make it so. Raider Duck (talk) 06:45, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
- I declined your request at the Administrator Intervention Against Vandalism Noticeboard to block Raider Duck. You two have a content dispute and I suggest you talk it out. See the Dispute Resolution Policy for more guidance. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 06:55, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!