User talk:Trilobyte fossil
Say Hello
[edit]Welcome; please say hello (note - you might want to RIGHT click on that, and open in in a new tab or something - and when you get there, please wait a few mins for a reply) Chzz ► 22:23, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Welcome
[edit]Hi, Trilobyte fossil. This is NOT some automated message...it's from a real person. You can talk to me right now. Welcome to Wikipedia! I noticed you've just joined, and wanted to give you a few tips to get you started. If you have any questions, please talk to us.
June 2009
[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to VF-87, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: VF-87 was changed by Trilobyte fossil (u) (t) redirecting article to non-existant page on 2009-06-01T13:40:55+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 13:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Bot kicked in in the middle of a redirect - it needs to run a bit slower. Redirect is now complete.
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page International Gladiators 2. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. AndrewrpTally-ho! 13:42, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Messages left on Users talk page explaining edits. [Twice deleted by user which is not regarded as good practice.][actually archived - see below]
- Reverting article to a state appropriate to the tags on it.
Usually...
[edit]... you must not remove ANY content from a page without consensus. THIS APPLIES TO THIS CASE, ALSO. Just because the material is unrefrenced, it should not be deleted without some talk on the article's talk page. AndrewrpTally-ho! 14:01, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, if you remove content from a page, it is considered vandalism. You should discuss any major changes, such as yours, on the article's talkpage. Also, it is in my archive for resolved issues.
Your recent edits
[edit]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) 14:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Niederhoffer Piece
[edit]Hi I noticed that you removed large chunks of information from the Victor Niederhoffer article, claiming that they were "puffery". Some of your edits made a lot of sense, such as removing the names of non notable family members, but you also removed the fact that Education of a Speculator was a NY Times Bestseller, the names of well known money managers who got their start at the firm asking if they were still solvent (I suggest you ask that question on the pages of the various ex employees that you suspect of being insolvent, rather than on the Niederhoffer page).
You removed a link to a paper on market microstructure, that is very much in the news at the moment because of the flash orders debate and the recent Goldman programmer accused of stealing code that relates to these opportunities. While I appreciate you may not be interested in this page, it is unreasonable to remove huge chunks from an article without doing any research and discussing it on the talk page. Swism (talk) 18:59, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
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) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
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) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)