User talk:Verify references

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 16:35, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Verify references, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Verify references! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Mz7 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

March 2019

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Christchurch mosque shootings. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. I appreciate your edits, but don't let me ever see you use the word that you used in this edit summary. Drmies (talk) 16:08, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

apologies for using colloquial language. Verify references (talk) 16:14, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

for other users reference, I called the perpetrator of the christchurch mosque shootings, a Retard (pejorative) in the edit comment which i didnt think anyone would consider to be especially offensive. Verify references (talk) 16:41, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

By all means, repeat it a few more times. I'm astounded that you think this is somehow OK, or that it was OK in that context. Drmies (talk) 21:56, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your question

You asked your question at the wrong place, so I removed it from there, but to answer your question: if you believe your warning is unfair, it is best to contact the person that warned you directly via their talk page. MrClog (talk) 18:43, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that enquiry too. Let me clarify it a bit further for you. If you refer to any other human being as a "retard" anywhere on Wikipedia again, your editing privileges will likely be revoked. And if you need a "why" for that, then it's likely you do not posses the emotional maturity to edit in this collegial project. There is never any reason to use that word anywhere, and the fact that you're posting in multiple places, asking that to be explained to you smacks of trolling. Just stop, and go back to editing the encyclopedia please. John from Idegon (talk) 20:06, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of AbdelFattah Rahhaoui for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article AbdelFattah Rahhaoui is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AbdelFattah Rahhaoui until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:36, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retired?

Per WP:HIGHMAINT, please don't retire or throw a bunch of drama about retiring, just to suddenly return. Retiring is a very serious thing, and if you are making edits while retired it can look suspicious, like your account has been hacked. If you are going to return to the project, please remove the retired template from your user page, and think carefully before re-adding it. Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 01:43, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is bad faith closure of topic. I'm notifying you are I'm unsure if you are the one who re-opened the discussion so there is a risk you may have decided to drop the issue and are no longer following it. (And pings aren't considered sufficient notification for ANI since they can fail or be disabled etc.) Nil Einne (talk) 05:05, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Acroterion (talk) 12:42, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Inorganic Being

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

Confusingly written, not supported by reliable sources. While the phrase "inorganic being" has some use in academic literature, its usage here is completely unrelated to what I've been able to find in RS.

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. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 21:27, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Alma and Lila Lévy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alma and Lila Lévy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alma and Lila Lévy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Viztor (talk) 19:31, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]