Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Fire Star 21:55, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Narf was and is a redirect to a larger article on the subject the term relates to. Your edits broke the redirect to create a one sentence "article," so it was reverted. You changed it back without discussion or edit summary so it appeared to be simply disruptive. There is a learning curve here, so perhaps it wasn't, although you had created nonsense articles which were speedy deleted (which is why you got a test3 message). You can sign your username on our pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. For more info, please see the following:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

Regards, --Fire Star 15:12, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Thank you. Rockpocket 05:24, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to be unclear (I explained what I was doing in the edit summary of all places). 23.4% is the answer to Marco Polo's question about the proportion of the earth north of 50°N and south of 50°S. Algebraist 13:20, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was laughing at the meta-humor, not the answer itself...notice that the question is posted twice in a row. DMacks 01:16, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adam. Thanks for keeping an eye on the medical advice on the Ref Desk. I know it can be frustrating; one tends to feel a bit of a grinch when one chastises editors whom you know are just trying to help. Keep up the good work.

I've asked the editors who offered medical advice not to do it again, with (what I think are) polite talk page messages. I've linked to Wikipedia:Reference desk/guidelines/Medical advice to help them identify what constitutes medical advice within the world of Wikipedia, and I've started a thread on the Ref Desk talk page (Wikipedia talk:Reference desk#Medical advice post mortem).

I hope that courteous encouragement will help to avoid this problem in the future. Cheers! TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:06, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is this the one? [1] David D. (Talk) 04:57, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aaadddaaammm - I've reverted your changes to Pavlova. It's standard practice for feminine versions of Russian surnames to share disambiguation pages with their masculine equivalents, as they are regarded as the same name. This was discussed in depth for the name pavlova a few months ago, and the consensus was for the talk page to redirect to the food and the article page to redirect to Pavlov. Grutness...wha? 22:47, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aaadddaaammm, Just to say thanks for calming down the heat at the end of this question. Debate on the RD over my dead body! I'm not responding there because it has all gone a tad too far already. Best wishes. Richard Avery (talk) 13:39, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...but let's just say We take vandalism very seriously on Wikipedia and have taken drastic measures to make an example of vandals in the past.----occono (talk) 19:01, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Crittenden-Johnson Resolution. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Tim Song (talk) 19:18, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, i saw your post in another section to refer to here about a DNA question. Mine basically is if there can be an exact finger print match between 2 people, or if it is impossible what proof is there. Im sure out of 6 billion plus people, 2 people must come very close if not exact match. I hope you can help me on this as no one has been able to provide proof on the matter yet. I would appreciate any information on the matter though, and you can even email if you prefer at a.marsters@hotmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.180.115.181 (talk) 09:36, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mammals#Capitalization debate. Mikemoral♪♫ 20:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})[reply]

Please comment, thank you. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 08:29, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, seeing as there is now much more clear EV, perhaps you would like to reconsider your vote? J Milburn (talk) 12:14, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Talk:Platypus, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 11:20, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WTH man? Please revert your reversion. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 11:21, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 11:23, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Monotremes and Marsupials, you may be blocked from editing. Shirt58 (talk) 11:24, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism". Revert it! Aaadddaaammm (talk) 11:25, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good grief; this is a storm-in-a-teacup.

A user wishing to discuss whether or not the 'p' in Platypus should be in caps, or not, is entirely entitled to raise it on the talk page.

Issuing all these dire warnings for this sort of thing is not helpful; in fact, that is the disruption here.

I would not consider those edits to be 'vandalism'; it looks to be an attempt at a discussion. Can't see anything wrong with them.

So, anyone complaining, please have a cup of tea, keep calm, and discuss it instead of issuing template warnings. Thanks.  Chzz  ►  12:07, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aaadddaaammm, and thanks for your message.
I do appreciate that you're not happy with all templated additions to your talkpage. I'd feel exactly the same way if was happening to me. Lets talk about this.
On 30 Jan 2011 you wrote:

Hey, your opinion is requested at the talk page of the platypus article, to finally put this stupid capitalisation debate to rest. Cheers!

or words to that effect on a number of article talkpages and user talkpages. I can't see where there is a problem. It would seem to me to be canvasing. If you can specify a valid concern about the capitalisation of "Platypus", let me know, and I'll back you up all the way.
Thanks again, --Shirt58 (talk) 12:07, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, Shirt. So, let's use Talk:Platypus#fIGHT cAPITALISM!. Cheers.  Chzz  ►  13:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Temple of the Dawn 01 Photo D Ramey Logan perspective.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Maedin\talk 07:37, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• * Well done and thank you for your help and support of my photographic efforts. WPPilot--WPPilot 05:22, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for the comment on the helmet picture. How about his one File:Helmet of Cotofenesti - Front by Radu Oltean.jpg? I am not an expert so I am not sure what do you mean about the "XAT" reflection and cloning it out. Could you clarify? Thanks --Codrin.B (talk) 13:19, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. There was an edit added fairly late in this nomination. I'd appreciate it if you could state a preference among the various edits so that I can figure out which one to promote. Thanks. Makeemlighter (talk) 04:34, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:FocusStack BrightFieldLightMicroscopy DiatomaceousEarth.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Jujutacular talk 03:48, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please take another look of the image, after a larger version was uploaded by Keraunoscopia. Tomer T (talk) 12:37, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adam. Another edit was added, your current comment might be misleading. --Tomer T (talk) 11:09, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! I just wondered! Thank you though- I'm not a photographer, but I know what I need to work on now! Which was sort of why I tried. Cheers. Benny Digital ^{Speak Your Brains} 19:10, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ta!

Benny Digital ^{Speak Your Brains} 19:11, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TCO (reviews needed) 17:23, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've uploaded a new version and I changed the image of Earth with the Blue Marble, if you think it is also as good as the original, I'll upload it over the original version, please let me know what you think, thank you.   ■ MMXX  ^talk  12:47, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've decided to leave comments at Picture Peer Review since that area seems to be in need of feedback. I notice you're a pretty regular contributor there, and you seem to know a bit about photography, so I'd just like to let you know I'll be helping out, but I'm pretty much a novice photographer, so if I say anything you think is wrong or stupid feel free to correct me. Thanks! -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 21:41, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Missing square puzzle.svg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 22:18, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Aaadddaaammm. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates#Thermite.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, and welcome to the 2012 WikiCup! The competition officially began at the start of 2012 (UTC), and so you are free to claim any content from after that time. Your submission page, where you must note any content for which you wish to claim points, can be found here, and formatting instructions can be found in hidden comments on the page. A bot will then update the main table, which can be seen on the WikiCup page. The full rules for what will and will not be awarded points can be found at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. There's also a section on that page listing the changes that have been made to the rules this year, so that experienced participants can get up-to-date in a few seconds. One point of which we must remind everyone; you may only claim points for content upon which you have done significant work, and which you have nominated, in 2012. For instance, articles written or good article reviews started in 2011 are not eligible for points.

This round will last until late February, and signups will remain open until the middle of February. If you know of anyone who may like to take part, please let them know about the comeptition; the more the merrier! At the end of this round, the top 64 scorers will progress to the next round, where their scores will reset, and they will be split into pools. Note that, by default, you have been added to our newsletter list; we will be in contact at the end of every month with news. You're welcome to remove yourself from this list if you do not wish to hear from us. Conversely, those interested in following the competition are more than welcome to add themselves to the list. Please direct any questions towards the judges, or on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn (talk) and The ed17 (talk) 13:51, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I also personally think the word is not really necessary. But Jimmy put it there for a reason. So let him decide if/when he wants to remove it.

Best regards. Farine (talk) 17:34, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2012 is off to a flying start. At the time of writing, we have 112 contestants; comparable to last year, but slightly fewer than 2010. Signups will remain open for another week, after which time they will be closed for this year. Our currrent far-away leader is Grapple X (submissions), due mostly to his work on a slew of good articles about The X-Files; there remain many such articles waiting to be reviewed at good article candidates. Second place is currently held by Ruby2010 (submissions), whose points come mostly from good articles about television episodes, although good article reviews, did you knows and an article about a baroness round out the score. In third place is Jivesh boodhun (submissions), who has scored 200 points for his work on a single featured article, as well as points for work on others, mostly in the area of pop music. In all, nine users have 100 or more points. However, at the other end of the scale, there are still dozens of participants who are yet to score. Please remember to update your submission pages promptly!

The 64 highest scoring participants will advance to round 2 in a month's time. There, they will be split into eight random groups of eight. The score needed to reach the next round is not at all clear; last year, 8 points guaranteed a place. The year before, 20.

A few participants and their work warrant a mention for achieving "firsts" in this competition.

• 12george1 (submissions) was the first to score, with his good article review of Illinois v. McArthur.
• 12george1 (submissions) was also the first to score points for an article, thanks to his work on Hurricane Debby (1982)- now a good article. Tropical storms have featured heavily in the Cup, and good articles currently have a relatively fast turnaround time for reviews.
• Sp33dyphil (submissions) was the first to score points for a did you know, with Russian submarine K-114 Tula. Military history is another subject which has seen a lot of Cup activity.
• Sp33dyphil (submissions) is also the first person to successfully claim bonus points. Terminator 2: Judgment Day is now a good article, and was eligible for bonus points because the subject was covered on more than 20 other Wikipedias at the start of the competition. It is fantastic to see bonus points being claimed so early!
• Speciate (submissions) was the first to score points for an In the News entry, with Paedophryne amauensis. The lead image from the article was also used on the main page for a time, and it's certainly eye-catching!
• Jivesh boodhun (submissions) was the first to score points for a featured article, and is, at the moment, the only competitor to claim for one. The article, "Halo" (Beyoncé Knowles song), was also worth double points because of its wide coverage. While this is an article that Jivesh and others have worked on for some time, it is undeniable that he has put considerable work into it this year, pushing it over the edge.

We are yet to see any featured lists, featured topics or good topics, but this is unsurprising; firstly, the nomination processes with each of these can take some time, and, secondly, it can take a considerable amount of time to work content to this level. In a similar vein, we have seen only one featured article. The requirement that content must have been worked on this year to be eligible means that we did not expect to see these at the start of the competition. No points have been claimed for featured portals or pictures, but these are not content types which are often claimed; the former has never made a big impact on the WikiCup, while the latter has not done so since 2009's competition.

A quick rules clarification before the regular notices: If you are concerned that another user is claiming points inappropriately, please contact a judge to take a look at the article. Competitors policing one another can create a bad atmosphere, and may lead to inconsistencies and mistakes. Rest assured that we, the judges, are making an effort to check submissions, but it is possible that we will miss something. On a loosely related note: If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:55, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey bro, we all know the helicopter army guys picture is never going to be promoted, but it's not so constructive ripping the newbie to shreds about it. It is a pretty striking image at (small) thumbnail, I don't blame them for thinking "Hey this image is pretty cool, I wonder if it could be a FP". Peace! Aaadddaaammm (talk) 20:26, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Hey Aaadddaaammm, I thought that if I was to propose that a nomination be speedily closed, then I had better provide some pretty strong reasoning to support that proposition. I didn't mean to rip anyone to shreds. Maybe it is an unwritten rule that speedy close is only meant to be used in obvious bad faith nominations - I don't know, I haven't been in the featured picture nomination area of Wikipedia that long myself. I can only hope that as one of Wikipedia's most prolific editors (far from the newbie you describe them as) they were not as affected as you seem to fear. God Emperor^Talk 22:05, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aaadddaaammm, this is just to let you know that I have uploaded a restored version of the image nominated at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Hadji Ali. This notice is being delivered to you as you previously voted / commented at the nomination page. Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:30, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination has been put on hold to determine which edit is preferred. As you voted but did not indicate a preference, could you leave some feedback at the nomination page? Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:11, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion at Commons:Commons_talk:Featured_picture_candidates#Proposal:_Change_to_FP_criteria_for_new_nominations:_disallow_.22GFDL_1.2_only.22_and_.22GFDL_1.2_and_an_NC-only_license.22. Please participate. -- Jkadavoor (talk) 16:51, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Aaadddaaammm. You have new messages at Talk:Churel#Tone.
Message added 17:12, 31 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Redtigerxyz ^Talk 17:12, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replied. Please check. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:48, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Largest organisms, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Maori (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adam,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Missing square puzzle.svg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on March 9, 2013. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2013-03-09. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:15, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Aaadddaaammm. You have new messages at Talk:List of scientists whose names are used in chemical element names.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Aaadddaaammm. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 January 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 74th Golden Globe Awards, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 21:12, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Aaadddaaammm. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Aaadddaaammm. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Aaadddaaammm. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Aaadddaaammm! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! — MusikBot II ^talk 17:00, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]