User talk:MrMojoRisin71

October 2012

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment on Jean-Jacques Rousseau, use the sandbox. Thank you....Modernist (talk) 23:19, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Jean-Jacques Rousseau, you may be blocked from editing. ...Modernist (talk) 00:22, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please make sure to include an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks!...Modernist (talk) 00:24, 22 October 2012 (UTC) This is your only warning; if you vandalize Jean-Jacques Rousseau again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ...Modernist (talk) 03:21, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Materialscientist (talk) 03:43, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Muammar al-Gaddafi still alive.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! A412 (Talk • C) 03:32, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Muammar al-Gaddafi still alive concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Muammar al-Gaddafi still alive, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 18:12, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Muammar al-Gaddafi still alive

Hello MrMojoRisin71. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Muammar al-Gaddafi still alive".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Muammar al-Gaddafi still alive}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 04:00, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

October 2014

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Georgia Guidestones. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. McGeddon (talk) 11:35, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Muammar Gaddafi, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Connormah (talk) 00:38, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Muammar al Gaddafi salute.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Muammar al Gaddafi salute.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. McGeddon (talk) 07:45, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Georgia Guidestones

The "2014 cube" and sources used to support it are being discussed at Talk:Georgia_Guidestones#2009_notch_.26_the_2014_.27cube.27 - it looks like there aren't yet any reliable sources supporting this story. Please don't add it back again unless you can address that. --McGeddon (talk) 13:21, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Muammar al-Gaddafi.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Muammar al-Gaddafi.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 18:23, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2015

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 00:10, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Herbert Hinzie Kersten for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Herbert Hinzie Kersten is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Herbert Hinzie Kersten until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Westroopnerd (talk) 19:11, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Herbert H. Kersten.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Herbert H. Kersten.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:46, 23 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 2015

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Herbert Hinzie Kersten. Thank you. Doug Weller (talk) 15:51, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Writing at the AfD page " all the yahoos posting here haven't even seen the documentary. Yet they obviously have an opinion like the self-righteous morons they are" is completely unacceptable. We have to have some criteria or everyone in the world could have their own article. If you want the article to be kept you have to see how he meets our criteria at [[Wikipedia:Notability (people)]. Doug Weller (talk) 15:53, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Herbert H. Kersten

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.

A tag has been placed on Herbert H. Kersten, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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. --Animalparty! (talk) 02:03, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

August 2015

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. The article was deleted through the proper process. You evidently decided to ignore that and created a new version using a slightly different name. If you do that again you are likely to be blocked. You can appeal the original decision at WP:DRV. Doug Weller (talk) 18:13, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ANI discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Doug Weller (talk) 09:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:56, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not re-create articles that have been through AfD unless you have the approval of either the deleting admin (JohnCD) or deletion review. The proper protocol would have you first approach JohnCD and if he declines, then you can bring this up to DRV. Persistently re-creating the article because you personally disagree with the deletion is not appropriate and in this case is seen as highly disruptive. I'm only blocking you for 72 hours and during this time I would like you to look over the basic editing guidelines at WP:TRAINING. Since you also made some fairly heated comments at the AfD, I'd also like you to read over WP:CIVILITY. WP:COMMUNICATE is also a good guideline since you really need to be able to communicate with others on Wikipedia, which you do not seem to be doing right now. Once the block is up you can feel free to ask JohnCD (I've pinged him so he may be willing to discuss re-creation on your talk page during the block) and if he declines, go to DRV. Offhand I do have to say that you will need to provide very good sourcing in order to show that Kersten ‎would now pass notability guidelines. The only new source you provided was a letter to the editor for New American, which would not be considered a reliable source. What you need here are articles about Kersten in places that Wikipedia would consider reliable, like newspapers, academic texts, and the like. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:02, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ANI discussiohn

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Doug Weller (talk) 18:41, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Randykitty (talk) 18:48, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you attempt to do this again once the block is up you run the risk of getting permanently blocked from editing. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:11, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 2015

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Georgia Guidestones, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 00:45, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing - repeatedly, and despite warnings and two previous short blocks, re-creating an article that was deleted at an AfD discussion. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. JohnCD (talk) 19:10, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]