User talk:Ghetsmith

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to several articles that you proposed for deletion. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

They have all had their tags removed by several different editors.--and I totally agree. Several of them were sound articles with sexual content, and I remind you that WP:NOTCENSORED. Apart even from that, in general this sort of tagging is considered disruptive, and if you continue it on clearly inappropriate articles, you will probablyl be blocked.

Buit please continue making useful contributions to WP, and

Welcome!

Hello, Ghetsmith, 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 on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

DGG (talk) 22:38, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'd just like to direct your attention here. If you disagree with an editors decision to remove your deletion tag, by all means feel free to nominate the article at AfD, or to discuss why you feel the article should be deleted on the discussion page. Many thanks. BeL1EveR 09:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Your revert to include nuclear power on the renewable energy template is vandalism. You will never achieve consensus on nuclear being renewable. It is sustainable, but not renewable. While solar is also sustainable, you do not have to mine for solar ore like you do with nuclear power. 199.125.109.108 04:54, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense of Template:Future energy sources

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Template:Future energy sources, by Johnfos (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Template:Future energy sources provides no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Template:Future energy sources, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 10:39, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

Please familiarise yourself with Wikipedia:Three revert rule, you may not revert a page, or any part of a page, more than three times in any 24 period. You are likely to be blocked for doing so. Thanks. DrKiernan 13:01, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Ghetsmith for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. OhanaUnited ^{Talk page} 06:35, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]