User talk:SuperSmashBros.Brawl777

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, SuperSmashBros.Brawl777! I am RC-0722 and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

RC-0722 ^247.5/1 15:23, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 02:11, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear fellow editor:

Dragons are a legend. The piece you saw on finding one in the Himalayas was a mockumentary by Discovery Channel. Regards. --Againme (talk) 16:02, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Faithless Nelly Gray

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Faithless Nelly Gray, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.accd.edu/sac/english/bailey/nellgray.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 05:39, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So far all you have posted is the text of the poem. The text does not go here is goes in Wikisource along with other works by Thomas Hood. I have moved your text to User:SuperSmashBros.Brawl777/sandbox. If you actually want to write an article about the poem, please do so here. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 13:26, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

August 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Alansohn (talk) 01:56, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page Silent Hill. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Alansohn (talk) 01:58, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pyrrhic Victory

Hi. I see you're having a bit of a battle regarding the result of the Battle of Monte Cassino. I'm agnostic either way, but may I suggest you put your arguments with numbers and references in the Pyrrhic victory? section of the article's talk page? The way Wikipedia works, you should not infer Pyrrhic from the numbers; you should find a reference (or preferably several) in a reliable source(s) (book) which describes the result as Pyrrhic. For example, Lloyd Clark in Anzio, The Friction of War describes Operation Diadem (the last phase of Cassino + the breakout from Anzio) as Pyrrhic. Wikipedia etiquette demands that User:Jacurek should then articulate exactly what the objections are. In this way a clear consensus should be established. By the way, the Allies had 100,000 casualties not killed. This figure would include killed, injured and missing / captured. Stephen Kirrage^{talk - contribs} 10:24, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added a reference. Note that the two editors reverting you are currently under investigation as they coordinated revert and edit wars on a mailing list, in case you are wondering why suddenly an editor showed up to revert you, despite this editor never having edited this article before. Pantherskin (talk) 11:41, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding the reference for that. I did assume that the people reverting my edits were "trolling" the article early on, considering they made the edits with no reasons why. --SuperSmashBros.Brawl777 (talk) 16:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism Warning Level 2

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. tsunamishadow (talk) 01:07, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't commit any vandalism that I know of. What vandalism are you talking about? --SuperSmashBros.Brawl777 (talk) 01:20, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi have had a look over your edit Eastern Front (World War II), which added

Another failed idea, dubbed "Heaven-bound Missions", involved fortifying even the most unimportant of cities and the holding of these "fortresses" at any and all costs.

This is my wrongdoing as it looked like vandalism but I hadn't read the whole context of the paragraph. The reason it looked like vandalism is because it seemed to be opinionising, which unbalences Wikipedia's policy of neutraility. I could see now that this is a good edit and I only ask for my forgiveness. Sorry. tsunamishadow (talk) 01:51, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's no problem. --SuperSmashBros.Brawl777 (talk) 02:10, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2010

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Norbit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Robofish (talk) 03:00, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing

Hi, it has been brought to my attention that your recent multiple reversion edits - without talk page discussion - to Spanish Armada are somewhat disruptive. As your patterm of edits strongly appear to mirror a pattern of edits by another editor, i would encourage you to make sure you have read and understood these policies. Looking at the history, I am trying to assume good faith but evidence from your contribution histories strongly points to you being related to another account. If that is coincidental then fair enough, but edit summaries and the article history would suggest the contrary. Mfield (Oi!) 07:50, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Spanish Armada, you will be blocked from editing. Charles (talk) 10:01, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On collegial editing

Re. your comments on my talk page about the above warning: the point of consensus editing is to discuss modifications on the talk page, not to engage in an edit war that disrupts the article and just causes further antagonism all around. If you have a content issue with another editor then please use the article talk page to resolve your differences. Continued revert warring will not be tolerated. The reasons for being suspicious about puppetry are present in the edit histories of the two accounts. Both have narrow and overlapping subject interest areas, the new one was created very recently and immediately started editing articles about battles in a manner consistent with previous wikipedia experience. Both accounts take issue with edits by a common third editor, and both write edit summaries in a similar tone. I did say it may be entirely coincidental, but the similarity struck me immediately and if it quacks like a duck. I brought it up by way of warning and did not take the further step of an SPI case or checkuser request, which would be the next step if this pattern of edit warring continues. Mfield (Oi!) 23:06, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Taliban insurgency

I've just removed the figures you added to this article, as they were not supported by any citations. Moreover, the reference you gave in this edit summary does not provide those figures at all. Nick-D (talk) 23:08, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

April 2010

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at United States, you will be blocked from editing. Jarkeld (talk) 21:42, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:TrollinCentral.png

Thank you for uploading File:TrollinCentral.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Image Screening Bot (talk) 22:40, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:TrollinCentral.png

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as File:TrollinCentral.png, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 23:38, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

June 2010

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at United States, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --Bongwarrior (talk) 23:14, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My predecessor on this talk page is more generous than I am. This is at least your second vandalism to a high traffic article after being warned; 48 hour block; again and it becomes indefinite. --Golbez (talk) 23:41, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Texasrevolution.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Texasrevolution.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 "Edit this 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) 19:06, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

Medical articles on Wikipedia must be cited by the best available evidence and written in a consistent format. A list of resources to help edit such articles can be found here. Additionally, the diberri tool will aid in the formatting of references; all one needs to do is cut and paste the results. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Cheers. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:51, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Materialscientist (talk) 01:00, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]