User talk:Nhajivandi

Greetings...

Hello, Nhajivandi, and welcome to Wikipedia!

To get started, click on the link that says "welcome".

I (and the rest of us here, too) hope you like it here and decide to stay!

Happy editing! I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 17:09, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of University of Rio Grande, Meigs Center

Hello Nhajivandi, this is a message from an automated bot to inform you that the page you created, University of Rio Grande, Meigs Center, has been marked for speedy deletion by User:Sopher99. This has been done because the page is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader (see CSD). If you think the tag was placed in error, please add "{{hangon}}" to the page text, and edit the talk page to explain why the page should not be deleted. If you have a question about this bot, please ask it at User talk:SDPatrolBot II. If you have a question for the user who tagged the article, see User talk:Sopher99. Thanks, - SDPatrolBot II (talk) on behalf of Sopher99 (talk · contribs) 11:35, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of University of Rio Grande, Meigs Center

I have nominated University of Rio Grande, Meigs Center, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Rio Grande, Meigs Center. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. • ɔ ʃ → 14:30, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Meigs center.JPG

Thank you for uploading File:Meigs center.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:46, 27 August 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:46, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to People's Republic of China has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. the wub "?!" 21:35, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at People's Republic of China, you may be blocked from editing. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:35, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was showing an example on how easy it was to blank out a page on Wikipedia, and i accidentally saved the changes. i was in the process of undoing it when the wub undid my changes. Very sorry and will not happened again. Nhajivandi (talk) 21:57, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I guess you got to show the consequences too :). -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:15, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

International response

Hi, please see talk page of main article, the international response section was removed mainly because it was riddled with copyvios. Feel of course free to use the sources to rebuild the list properly. See also User talk:Dr. Blofeld#International response. Cheers, Amalthea 22:43, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:2010 obama logo.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:2010 obama logo.JPG. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 04:05, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:2010 obama logo.JPG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:2010 obama logo.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. 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. Skier Dude2 (talk) 05:08, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I made a mistake by uploading it before putting the licensed on. I was going to delete the image, and put up a new one that is corected and one that has a license. Thing is I don't think i can delete it, so if you can delete it I would like that. Thanks you Nhajivandi (talk) 13:07, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

September 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Year of Hell, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. -- Doniago (talk) 13:46, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your sources

Hey! I appreciate your adding refrences, but please don't use yahoo as a source, find it from another site. Yahoo links die after about a week, and then can no longer be accessed. It mostly just reposts articles from the AP so there are plenty of other links to the same articles. Thanks!! Jeancey (talk) 01:26, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TB

Hello, Nhajivandi. You have new messages at Jnorton7558's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Jnorton7558 (talk) 02:21, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TB

Hello, Nhajivandi. You have new messages at Achowat's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Again

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Republican Governors Association, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scott Walker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo and China

Look at both Kosovo and China. Kosovo-Russia relations has been either deleted or redirected to Russia-Serbia relations. That had been done long ago. I will make a deal for you. Do you know how to redirect pages. I am not an expert at redirecting articles. So here is what I think you should do. Since you know alot about redirecting, I wish that you can redirect the the articles People's Republic of China–Kosovo relations to People's Republic of China-Serbia relations. Iam telling you that when I looked at that page and I had found out that the Kosovo section of People's Republic of China-Serbia relations is almost 90% identical to People's Republic of China–Kosovo relations. So I hope that you can redirect the article of People's Republic of China–Kosovo relations to People's Republic of China-Serbia relations. That way the tensions that are existing between us over these articles can be avoided at Wikipedia. Also regarding Canada, I think that the article was already done and later redirected so that will have to be worked out. I hope you have some good suggestions for that. In the meantime Nhajivandi I hope you like my sugesstions for both Kosovo and China and that you will respond to me as soon as possible. MyRx talk 9:37, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I will consider it and get back to you on it. I haven't had time to look today, but I will try looking at it tomorrow if I have time. In the meantime, the edits I made will stand until I make my discussion concerning your deal. Nhajivandi (talk) 05:12, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I looked tonight instead and I have decided to keep the edits as they are. Furthermore, your editing history and your editing style is questionable as it is similar to sock-puppets from the past that have edited pages like you have with Kosovo pages. I apologize but under these reasons, I cannot make a deal with you at this time, sorry. Nhajivandi (talk) 06:36, 23 February 2012 (UTC) Nhajivandi I am sorry but I have to undo your edits because I have told you several times the one about Canada has been redirected and regarding China you can either redirect it or delete it from here. I am sorry but I must undo your edits and I am not the banned user Koov. I have told you the deal that it is still on offer and you must either delete the article about China or just leave it alone like Armenia-Kosovo relations or Bosnia and Herzegovina-Kosovo relations. So just trust me, I am not like the banned user Koov and I just want you to change the part about China. I can't accept this edits because we know that artlcle about Kosovo-Russia relations was redirected. The only option will be in my opinion is to redirect the artlcle of People's Republic of China-Kosovo relations to People's Republic of China-Serbia relations. Just look at that article and just redirect them. By redirecting the article we can end some of the tensions that exist between us. User:MyRx talk 9:36 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

March 2012

Thank you for trying to keep Wikipedia free of vandalism. However, one or more edits you labeled as vandalism, such as the edit at User talk:Rokoop, are not considered vandalism under Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia has a stricter definition of the word "vandalism" than common usage, and mislabeling edits as vandalism can discourage newer editors. Please read Wikipedia:NOTVAND for more information on what is and is not considered vandalism. Thank you. Sudo Ghost 05:37, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing a single edit of Rokoop's that you reverted that would constitute vandalism, and being a suspected sockpuppet (which is not the same as a tagged or confirmed sockpuppet) doesn't make the edits vandalism. When you use twinkle in this way, it marks your edit as WP:MINOR, and because what you're reverting isn't vandalism, the edit isn't minor, which makes using twinkle in this way an improper use of the tool. Please keep this in mind when reverting edits. Thank you. - Sudo Ghost 05:49, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh ok, I apologize on that one, I should have pressed rollback instead of vandalism on the TW tool. The reason I did that was because the person Rokoop is under investigation for being a sock puppet and I thought such warnings had to be left on there. I Just started using the tool today and im still figuring out the TW tool. but in no way am I trying to discourage anyone. including new users. Again I apologized again for this and I will make sure not to make that mistake again. Thank you for pointing that out. Nhajivandi (talk) 05:54, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I Just saw your last comment on here. I always thought that it was considered vandlism when the tool pops up the rollback vandalism options. I will keep that in mind however some like the one on the kosovo template I would consder because the link for Canada was good and it did link to the right area and it was removed. But again thank you for pointing these things out. Nhajivandi (talk) 06:01, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually between the two you'd be better off using Twinkle than rollback, if you have rollback and use it incorrectly, you'd risk having rollback rights removed. However, you can use twinkle to revert back to a specific edit, which will prompt you for an edit summary, and wouldn't mark the edit as minor or as a vandalism reversion. However, I certainly understand why you did it, and I'm certainly not accusing you of anything, just letting you know. The talk page guidelines say that people are allowed to remove (almost) anything from their talk pages. Take care. - Sudo Ghost 06:03, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ohio University Credit Union

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 Ohio University Credit Union requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent 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. Tchaliburton (talk) 06:03, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ohio University Credit Union

I have deleted this page because it was directly or very closely copied from their official website. This is strictly prohibited by Wikipedia rules, see WP:Copyright. Feel free to re-create the article in your own words, but be sure to cite reliable sources in a way that shows the subject is notable. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on my talk page. Thank you -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 07:32, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Nhajivandi. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 12:39, 1 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria policy

Please do not place (or replace) non-free files anywhere except for articles as you did at Template:Republican Wikipedians. Such use is a clear violation of point 9 of the Non-free content policy and will be reverted. VernoWhitney (talk) 22:41, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My apologize I did not know about this policy. I will abide by it thank you. But If that's the case, then what about the DNC logo in Template:Democrat Wikipedians? If im not allowed to put the GOP logo in the Republican template, should that also be taken off too? And I do not think that either political logos are copyrighted but again I could be wrong. Also sorry i didnt respond sooner. Thank you Nhajivandi (talk) 17:41, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seal

No idea if it's in line with usual practice, but it looks fine to me. It actually improves the look of the infobox, imo. Just thought I'd say, since you went to the trouble of writing a detailed edit summary. Rivertorch (talk) 06:09, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa, hold your horses. Please be careful not to edit war. I said I liked the look of it, but consensus appears to be against its inclusion, and we all need to respect consensus even if we disagree with it. Btw, I'm not an administrator. Rivertorch (talk) 06:59, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My apolgoise. My intencions were not at all to cause an edit war. I just thought I had a good idea and I did thought you were an asministrator. im really sorry about this. Nhajivandi (talk) 18:13, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! The majority tends to rule in the short term, so it's important to listen to what other editors are saying in their edit summaries and on talk pages. There's still room for lots of creative ideas; you just have to either apply them in places where no one cares or else make the case for applying them first. Be bold but not reckless, and you'll do fine. In theory, administrators have no special authority over content—just some extra tools to enforce policies when they're not being followed voluntarily. (That's also true in practice 99.9% of the time.) Rivertorch (talk) 04:21, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Funeral of Margaret Thatcher

The article Funeral of Margaret Thatcher has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Wikipedia:NOT (Crystal Ball) - Futurism and no proper content.

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. Humblesnore (talk) 23:54, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Humblesnore , There was no reason to put the nomination for deletion on this page because it is classified as a current event due to Mrs Thatcher's passing, Plus when a head of state or head of government dies is it very common to create these pages. I see that you are new to Wikipedia. I welcome you on here, but please don't add stuff like this unless it is absolutely necessary. Ive made mistakes when I first started but you get the hang of it. Thank you Nhajivandi (talk) 00:18, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sheffield, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sheffield Hallam (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:14, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your RFA

I closed your Request for Adminship under WP:NOTNOW (as a non-bureaucrat), due to the many concerns about having enough experience and the obvious way that the voting had turned. It sounds like you are on the way towards adminship if you continue working like you have, but it is common for the community to want to see many more edits before allowing someone to have access to the tools. I hope you take the good advice given and consider another run for RFA when you have more edits. Thanks for putting yourself forward. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 12:38, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Nhajivandi. You have new messages at 331dot's talk page.
Message added 23:51, 16 April 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

331dot (talk) 23:51, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

THERE IS NO VANDALISM

…at the Rauner page, but a serious revision, because the earlier information (1) is unsourced, and (2) is based on premature media (rather than official) reporting. For the record, I am actually a supporter of this political change, but I am a bigger supporter of firm WP policies. BOTTOM LINE, YOU REVERTED TEXT THAT THREE PREVIOUS EDITORS HAVE SUPPORTED (BECAUSE IN THEIR EDITS, TWO OTHERS ONLY DID MINOR TOUCHUPS), AND EDITS THAT WERE EARNEST, AND CONSISTENT WITH WP POLICY. I am reverting your change, and will seek administrative protections if you reintroduce it without discussion AND CONSENSUS OF THE THREE EDITORS INVOLVED. 71.239.87.100 (talk) 06:24, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My apologize, i did it because in my view it looked like it was starting to and i wanted to go to a earlier version to strat over, i thought it was and i misjudge. I am also half awake because it is 1 in the morning so i wasnt trying to cause trouble at all when i did the edit, and ive also taken a few months off from editing so im a bit rusty. But you are right what i did was out of line, Next time i do something like this, i will ask for disussion. Again my apolgize. Nhajivandi (talk) 06:40, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please proceed cautiously

…at the Rauner article. First, there is no bias. Period. I am holding the reporting to the facts: that there is a media report of victory, and no official State Board of Elections result. Even to this standard, the earlier text failed, because it provides no sources, at all, for this edit to a BLP article. Second, there is no vandalism. I am a registered user with extensive experience and edits. Third, there is no mess. There is an extensive in-text note, in a markup form that is accepted, that explains clearly why the reversion of the premature declaration of the unofficial victory was edited out. I have asked the article be semi protected. Please seek consensus at talk, before returning this clearly flawed, clearly biased "victory text" to the article. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 06:47, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ive sent a message to your talk page explaning what happened this evining. Nhajivandi (talk) 07:01, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Justin Trudeau

Would you please clarify your message at my talkpage. GoodDay (talk) 04:40, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

December 2015

Your addition to The James Cancer Hospital has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:49, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Diannaa, I didn't think or realize I was violating any violations so i apologize if I did. Could you please clarify on what was consider copyright infringement? All im doing is revamping the page and adding more info to the page as this is a major hospital in my home state and there wasnt much info on it. Also,all the edits im doing are in good faithWP:GOODFAITH and in no way did I mean to violate anything intentionally. Is it possible to add that info back on the page in some way without violating any policy, Im willing to compromise as well.

Thank you and hope to hear from you.Nhajivandi (talk) 21:33, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

Would you please achieve consensus rather than force your own opinion? The talk page very clearly explains why your edits are not appropriate until midnight. Thank you for understanding.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:28, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited! Great Buckeye Wiknic 2016

Hello there! You are invited to attend the Great Buckeye Wiknic in Columbus, Ohio on Sunday, July 10th from 1:00 to 5:00 PM! Join us for a day in the park for food and socializing with others from the Wikimedia movement. We'll be meeting up at Fred Beekman Park, a park on Ohio State University's campus.

If you're interested, please take a look at our events page for more information, including parking info, food options, and available activities. If you plan on attending, please add your name to the attendees list. We look forward to seeing you!

If you have any questions, feel free to leave one on my talk page. Thanks! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 05:39, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Note: If you would like to stop receiving notifications regarding Wikimedia events around Ohio, you may remove your username from this list.)

I will definitely consider going. Thanks! Nhajivandi (talk) 11:53, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

UFC 200

Tate vs nunes is the headine Wwemeowmeow (talk) 04:34, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

UFC 200

Hello. I can see you don't update mma articles and you show up out of nowhere to revert the article... Have you taken the time to read it? I've been updating that article (and many other related to the subject) for years. I've updated it because it has a valid source (as shown there and described as well) regarding the changes to the article. You simply decide to revert it and says it got "out of hands", which sounds odd considering your actions. If anything got out of hand, was you lack of attention for the situation. I've restored the article once again, but consider this a warning if you revert it one more time: I'll report you for edit warring. You're reverting without no reason, argument whatsoever. Please stop that. I'm not threatening you to stay away from such articles or "prohibiting" you from updating. But your actions there are unjustified. I hope you read this and really understands the situation. It doesn't have to get bigger than this, but it will if you don't follow the proper procedures. Thanks. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 04:40, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with Gsfelipe94 -Wwemeowmeow Wwemeowmeow (talk) 04:41, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK OK Lets all calm down here. I was not at all trying to get into an editing war or anything like that at all. The reason for my reversals were only to wait to see until tomorrow what the re brand of the UFC 200 title was going to be. That's all. Nothing more and nothing less. Gsfelipe I should have done a AGF instead of a reversal vandalism ill give you that. That was my mistake. So i do apologize to both of you for any misunderstanding. And no i dont do MMA edits on here but i do watch a lot of WWE and they have been promoting this fight heavy because of Lesner. So I hope the both of you can accept my apology and we can move on from this.Nhajivandi (talk) 04:57, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also to add on what i said earlier. I thought you guys were vandalizing the page and not the other way around. Again another misunderstanding and i aplogize for that. Nhajivandi (talk) 05:04, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem man, but you should've read the updates before just reverting. The main event always becomes the "title" of it. Since they announced the new one, it was pretty clear that Tate-Nunes was the headliner. Anyway, glad we could work it out and you're welcome to help on such articles. Gsfelipe94 (talk) 05:07, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I accept your apology. Wwemeowmeow (talk) 05:39, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Nhajivandi. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Nhajivandi. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please familiarize yourself with reliable sources

Please familiarize yourself with reliable sources for Wrestling articles at WP:PW/RS. Thanks, Chris "WarMachineWildThing" ^{Talk to me} 02:21, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I just thought because it was from one of the WWE's official twitter pages that I thought it was official. I can see where I made my mistake and I apologize. Thank you very much pointing this out. Nhajivandi (talk) 02:48, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Nhajivandi. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Election 1997

Labour lost one seat: West Bromwich West is "Speaker gain from Labour". It's a point of contention as many media didn't (and still don't) count the Speaker as a loss, but Wikipedia does: see Buckingham in 2010 as an example (Speaker gain from Con in that example). Spa-Franks (Edit: I also draw your attention to the official Parliament record of the election: page 8 clearly states 146 gains, 1 loss.) (talk) 08:11, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Nhajivandi. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The West Wing task force

Hi there! If you're receiving this, it's because you like The West Wing—I happen to love the show, and I'm trying to set up a task force for it under Wikipedia:WikiProject Television to improve its coverage on Wikipedia. If you'd like to join, please leave your name here—hope to see you there!

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:08, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:University of Rio Grande

Template:University of Rio Grande has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:42, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]