User talk:DontHammerMuammarRepealJalil

Welcome!

Hello, DontHammerMuammarRepealJalil, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Nigger baseball, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:04, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Nigger baseball

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Nigger baseball, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:04, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

16 April 2011 - user warning

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edits you made to Timeline of the 2011 Libyan civil war, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

the specific edit is here.--96.232.126.111 (talk) 11:58, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Timeline of the 2011 Libyan civil war, you may be blocked from editing. Binksternet (talk) 03:44, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of April 2011 in the Libyan Civil War

The article April 2011 in the Libyan Civil War has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article is a POV split from Timeline of the 2011 Libyan civil war.

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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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. Binksternet (talk) 03:56, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

17 april 2011 - disruptive editing

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Timeline of the 2011 Libyan civil war. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in you being blocked from editing.--96.232.126.111 (talk) 04:26, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011

This is your last warning; the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Timeline of the 2011 Libyan civil war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Bejinhan talks 04:49, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have a formating problem with the late-March 2011 timeline article so that it's not showing up the period 16-20 of that month. Can you help with that? I'm doing my best. Look into yourself and improve your act when it comes to throwing about the accusation of 'vandal' as you have. That accusation has been defeated by the reforms implemented succeeding to deal with the oversize tagging. It was four or more times the desirable -maximum- limit.DontHammerMuammarRepealJalil (talk) 05:38, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Massively blanking sections is how you deal with a "formatting problem"? Changing "pro-Zwai" to "pro-Gaddafi" is not vandalism? How does changing those help deal with your "formatting problem"? I am not even going to comment on your POV-pushing or edit summaries which supposedly tells that your edits divide the articles in sections for "manageability" while you are actually mass blanking sections. A few other editors are clearly having problems with you regarding your edits on the article. Discuss changes you want to make since your edits to the article are clearly controversial. Bejinhan talks 05:56, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Catastrophic misguidance caused the main timeline article to top out at 272kb when WP:SIZERULE is to split into parts not topping 60kb. I've rescued the situation and now only one of the subarticles is oversize. There was no massblanking. There was removal of the content to the subunits. See the talkpage of the Late-march timeline article for the discussion i've already taken care to initiate. I bet there's a lot of excess in that article which can be remove because it's lacking a reliable source or other wise duplicated in the main war article, main timeline article or the war subarticlesDontHammerMuammarRepealJalil (talk) 08:26, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You keep peppering the article with weasel words, then claim you're only fixing the formatting or other minor things. You don't fix article length by lopping off a bunch of text. Czolgolz (talk) 13:20, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is probably another sockpuppet by SuperblySpiffingPerson. TL565 (talk) 16:06, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

xxx in the Libyan Civil War articles nominated for deletion

Just to let you know, I have proposed that April 2011 in the Libyan Civil War, Early March 2011 in the Libyan Civil War, and February 2011 in the Libyan Civil War be deleted for the reasons I have stated at the following deletion discussion page (which you should look at): Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/April 2011 in the Libyan Civil War. Regards, –MuZemike 08:30, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Good idea. I'll add in the main timeline article. It's needed least of all.DontHammerMuammarRepealJalil (talk) 09:00, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/DontHammerMuammarRepealJalil

Hi DontHammerMuammarRepealJalil. I noticed you created a Requests for Adminship page some time ago; I was wondering as to what the status of that request might be. I think it's fair to warn you that new users are rarely successful at RfA and that the Wikipedia editing community sets very high standards for editors running for adminship. That being said, I strongly urge you to read Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship, User:Davidwr/Administration is not for new users, and Wikipedia:Not now, and ask you to reconsider whether you really do wish to go through with your candidacy; please understand that you stand very little to no chance of passing RfA at this point and that you are strongly discouraged from running for adminship. If you are still intent on running for adminship with that request and are absolutely positive this is what you want, please do let me know; otherwise, I'll go ahead and delete the RfA page for you in about a week or so from today. Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:36, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SuperblySpiffingPerson. Thank you. – TL565 (talk) 15:48, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for disruptive editing of various kinds, including: vandalism, unsourced negative statements about living people which are very likely to be libellous, deliberate attempts to mislead other editors about the nature of what you were doing (by various methods, such as misleading edit summaries, marking significant edits as minor, etc), at least one case of changing another editor's comment, persistent point of view pushing, etc etc. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:28, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your block has been extended to indefinite, as this is a sockpuppet account used to evade a block. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:10, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of April 2011 in the Libyan Civil War

A tag has been placed on April 2011 in the Libyan Civil War, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia for multiple reasons. Please see the page to see the reasons. If the page has since been deleted, you can ask me the reasons by leaving a message on my user talk page.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. noclador (talk) 06:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]