User talk:OtisTDog

Hello, OtisTDog, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:

If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
Always sign your posts on talk pages. That way, others will know who left which comments.
The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
Simplified Ruleset
How to edit a page
Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
Picture tutorial
How to write a great article
Naming conventions
Manual of Style
Wikipedia Glossary
If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also the Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy Wiki-ing!

-- Sango 123 22:53, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)

Hi, thanks for the message! I'll take some time to look into the Lost Liberty Hotel case and get back to you as soon as possible. Thanks, Sango 123 01:35, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Notice of Deletion Listing

I realize you've probably already seen the heading box. But wanted to follow the spirit of the suggested policy as much as possible. JasonCNJ 21:34, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We've had several disputes over the last day or so regarding the article on H. Res 333 but I do hope you'll admit that I've always been honest and acted in good faith. In listing the article for deletion, I complied with every wikipedia standard: I informed all major editors of the article in question with proper notice on their talk pages and my previous edits on the talk page of H. Res. 333 already indicated a likelihood of listing the article for deletion. Frankly, I find your additional notification to User talk:Nima Baghaei to be in bad faith. I doubt it rises to the level of a violation of the WP:CANVASS guideline and will not make it an issue. But. as you may have seen, I had already included a notice on User talk:Nima Baghaei by the time of your additional comment. I feel your extra reminder violates the spirit - though not the letter - of wikipedia guidelines. JasonCNJ 04:02, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I do believe you have acted in good faith, and I hope you will agree that I have, as well. I was not previously aware of WP:CANVASS, and I appreciate that you pointed it out to me. FYI, I did not examine the other topics on Nima's page before adding my note, since I was not aware of the great lengths you had gone to to be fair in this issue.

I genuinely appreciate your courtesy in the matter, and I hope we can cooperate successfully in the future. It may have been difficult, but I am quite pleased with the current state of the article and do appreciate your contributions.--OtisTDog 04:14, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of US House Resolution 333

I've nominated US House Resolution 333, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that US House Resolution 333 satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/US House Resolution 333 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of US House Resolution 333 during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. JasonCNJ 21:34, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

H Res 333

I started a new section on the H Res 333 talk page announcing my desire to relist the article for deletion now that the 110th Congress will expire shortly and the Resolution will die in Committee. Given that you created the article and we've had significant discussions about it, I wanted to make sure you saw my comments and invite your response. From the previous AfD discussion, it seemed like you would be open to removing the article once it officially died. I am eager to hear your views now. JasonCNJ (talk) 16:38, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello OtisTDog! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 244 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Cyril James Skidmore - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 21:49, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Truth: The Universe Is a Growing God

The article The Truth: The Universe Is a Growing God has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No apparent claim to notability under the special notability guideline for books, can't find significant coverage in reliable, secondary sources to establish notability under the general notability guideline.

While all 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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. joe decker ^{talk to me} 05:29, 18 March 2011 (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) 13:08, 23 November 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) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Artificial Minds

The article Artificial Minds has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Tagged as unsourced for a decade; tagged as possibly non-notable for years

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. --Another Believer _(Talk) 02:30, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Pacrat

The article Pacrat has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Violates WP:NEO - no evidence of widespread usage under this definition.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 07:35, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]