User talk:XMattingly

License tagging for Image:Rushmoreentrance.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Rushmoreentrance.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Chelsea Manning

There is a debate regarding this issue taking place on the talk page. Please do not alter the content of the article before the debate is resolved. — Richard BB 08:01, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please could you contribute to the discussion at Talk:Chelsea Manning concerning what the article title should be, and how Manning should be referred to. Whilst I agree entirely with your edit, you still need to make the case for it on the talk page. You will see that another editor reverted your edit before I could finish writing this message to you.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:01, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

August 2013

Your recent editing history at Chelsea Manning shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. — Richard BB 08:05, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

Per this SPI case, I have blocked your account for one month. If you think there are reasons you should be unblocked, add the text {{unblock|your unblock reason here}} to this page, outlining why you think you should be unblocked. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 20:00, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have unblocked your account per the email you've sent me. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt; please keep your contributions in the Bradley Manning area clean. Regards Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 20:07, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your email

Thanks for your email. I was glad to help. I have a few comments.

I can see why the admin blocked you. The information was presented in the SPI in such a way as to lead to that conclusion. He/she a mistake in good faith.

When you revert another user's edits it helps a lot to leave a useful edit summary. This makes it clearer to people what is going on. If you experiment with the edit controls on your talk page, you will see that one button is marked "undo". This button also appears on article histories. If you use the undo button it generates an edit summary that reads something like this: "Undid revision 571145214 by Courcelles (talk)" If you then add some text of your own to the edit summary saying why you are reverting, that makes a good edit summary.

If you need advice, just leave a message on my talk page.--Toddy1 (talk) 17:06, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Bradley Manning/October 2013 move request

Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]