User talk:K95
|
Category
[edit]Hi K95,
I hope I didn't go overboard in criticising your category. It was a pretty good joke. Anyway, welcome to WP! --Trovatore 03:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Nice reversion of vandalism on the above. Don't forget to leave a test template on the vandalising user's talk page, as in {{subst:test1}} for first offence, increasing the number each successive time, or in bad ongoing vandalism, report to WP:AIV. Tyrenius 00:55, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
LOL I wanted to rv that v! I had a cute edit summary too! "rv; as much as I am in total agreement with that opinion, it is unencyclopedic. Please post on the talk page. Thank you. :)" You have a wonderful day! |||||| E. Sn0 =31337= Talk 00:43, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article List of cities along the Great Lakes, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. K95 15:52, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, I created the list as a removal of a long list within the Great Lakes article. I thought the information was better as a list article rather than the long list in the main article, and I was reluctant to remove the information totally from wikipedia. "WP is not paper" so I didn't see the harm in the information staying - something that I find trivial might be exactly what someone else came to WP to find. I have no strong opinions on whether to keep or delete, but with a 50:50 call I would keep it, for the reason above. Do what you you think is right. If it does get deleted - then as good housekeeping you should also remove it's link from the see also section of the main article. Cheers, SeanMack 11:02, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I saw your most recent edit, and I don't see how the 5th longest game ever doesn't belong in the list. That in itself should make it notable enough to mention. I won't change it myself, as I already have done 3 reverts on the page. I removed today's game because it's not in the top 20 in length, and the OT win did not win a series or the Cup; either would make the game notable enough to mention, in my opinion, but neither situation applies. V-train (talk) 05:04, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
March 2015
[edit]
Please do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. RadioFan (talk) 04:23, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
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) 16:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)