User talk:Hdjensofjfnen/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Hdjensofjfnen. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
This is the February 2016 archive of Hdjensofjfnen.
February 2016
Proposed deletion of Solutions to DST
The article Solutions to DST has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Made up personal essay
While all constructive 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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Wisdom89 ♦talk 22:56, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Solutions to DST
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Solutions to DST requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. 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 this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. 331dot (talk) 22:56, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Response
Oops! I meant to write an essay, and didn't know how to create it on my page. You can delete the page. But can you help me with the essay? I copy-pasted it onto my User page. Hdjen 00:38, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
- Such essays unrelated to building an encyclopedia are not appropriate here. See WP:SOAPBOX. You're welcome to start your own web page to promote your personal opinions. Toddst1 (talk) 21:14, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:DSTSOLUTION listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:DSTSOLUTION. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:DSTSOLUTION redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Toddst1 (talk) 21:09, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
A beer for you!
|
I see you've recently been hit with numerous incongruous Wikipedia ideology. So . . . how's that welcome to Wikipedia workin' out for ya?!! MurderByDeletionism"bang!" 16:56, 11 February 2016 (UTC) |
Edits of the page User:GoneAwayNowAndRetired/Wikipedia is broken and failing
Unwelcome userpage edit
Constructive contributions are appreciated and strongly encouraged, but your recent edit to the userpage of another user may be considered vandalism. Specifically, your edit to User:GoneAwayNowAndRetired/Wikipedia is broken and failing may be offensive or unwelcome. In general, it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing others' userpages without their permission. Instead, please bring the matter to their talk page and let them edit their user page themselves if they agree on a need to do so. Please refer to Wikipedia:User page for more information on User page etiquette. Thank you. Shearonink (talk) 15:35, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Your continued edits to User:GoneAwayNowAndRetired/Wikipedia is broken and failing
This page is set up as a user page. Per WP:NOBAN which starts with "In general, it is usual to avoid substantially editing another's user and user talk pages", in my opinion it is best to leave a user page alone, especially one in which the editor has left Wikipedia. If the editor had wanted a "in a nutshell" template on their userpage essay, they would have done so. In my opinion, this page should be left as is. Shearonink (talk) 01:02, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
Message added 01:07, 11 February 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Shearonink (talk) 01:07, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello. You appear to be involved in an edit war on User:GoneAwayNowAndRetired/Wikipedia is broken and failing.
While the three-revert rule is hard and fast, please be aware that you can be blocked for edit warring without making 3 reverts to an article in 24 hours. You are not entitled to 3 reverts and edit wars may be slow-moving, spanning weeks or months. Edit wars are not limited to 24 hours.
If you are unclear how to resolve a content dispute, please see dispute resolution. You are expected to cooperatively engage other editors on talk pages rather than reverting their edits. Note that posting your thoughts on the talk page alone is not a license to continue reverting. You must reach consensus.
If you feel your edits might qualify as one of the small list of exceptions, please apply them with caution and ensure that anyone looking at your edits will come to the same conclusion. If you are uncertain, seek clarification before continuing. Quite a few editors have found themselves blocked for misunderstanding and/or misapplying these exceptions. Often times, requesting page protection or a sockppuppet investigation is a much better course of action.
Continued edit warring on User:GoneAwayNowAndRetired/Wikipedia is broken and failing or any other article may cause you to be blocked without further notice. Toddst1 (talk) 02:02, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Response
I didn't realize that this was the user's homepage and not an essay [there was an errant tag that informed me it was an essay]. Thanks for warning me! Hdjensofjfnen (Is something wrong?) 22:40, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Talkback --> Talk:Doomsday Clock
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Linguist 111talk 12:51, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
No problem. :) Linguist 111talk 21:36, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.