User talk:Tabya

January 2011

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Georgia Moffett. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful, then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --Marker10 (talk) 16:43, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted twice and explained my reasons on the discussion page. Your source is The Sun and the article is about a living person. Please read Talk:Georgia Moffett. --Tabya (talk) 17:18, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

David Tennant

Just wanted to say kudos for your hard work and diligent editing on David Tennant and other DT- and DW-related pages. Starhunterfan (talk) 18:22, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the cookie and your kind words. I'm just a fan procrastinating, really. :) --Tabya (talk) 23:24, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tennant-Moffett child

Come on! I made the perfect edit — multiple sources, formatting! What on earth is the problem? D B D 17:12, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The name of the child is either Olive, Olivia or something else. The child's date of birth is also not the 1 April or 31 March, it's either Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday. That is why tabloid articles should never be used as sources for living persons -- they get all the facts wrong.

We'll wait until a newspaper runs an article, or just state that a daughter was born at the end of March 2011. --Tabya (talk) 17:29, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Much Ado About Nothing

I don't understand your deletions. Could you please advise? Thank you, Aliciacolleen (talk) 19:18, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your links are adverts for a play on Facebook (or whatever). There is (in my opinion) not enough relevance for this performance (or whatever) to be included in the article. Also, external links only go to the External links section -- but again only if they are relevant enough. --Tabya (talk) 19:27, 22 April 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) 14:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]