User talk:RPhilbrook

Welcome!

Hello, RPhilbrook, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! De728631 (talk) 14:44, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Ériu

I have left a reply for you at this talk page, explaining why I have now merged the two articles. De728631 (talk) 14:44, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tamarud

I notice that you tagged the page Tamarud for speedy deletion with the reason "G1". While that's a valid reason for speedy deletion in general, this page does not qualify for speedy deletion under that criterion because that category explicitly excludes poor writing. If you still want the page to be deleted, please consider tagging it with a speedy deletion template which does apply, redirecting it to another page, propose the page for deletion if it appears to be an uncontroversial matter, or take the page to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion for discussion on the merits. Thanks! --BDD (talk) 05:54, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Va-va-voom

Hi. I'm just letting you know that I have declined your CSD-A7 at Va-va-voom because that kind of article is not covered by CSD criteria. If you feel the article should be deleted, please consider PROD instead. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:55, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you are very new here with a total of only 233 edits. If you wish to patrol new pages and/or tag pages for deletion, please read WP:NPP and WP:DELETION first. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:57, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto for Stonewall, Dallas, Texas. And, in particular read WP:CSD, the speedy deletion criteria. They are interpreted narrowly, as written. DGG ( talk ) 21:05, 9 July 2013 (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) 16:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, RPhilbrook. 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]