Hello, JLOPO, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as List of Boy's Life Characters, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Fyddlestix (talk) 23:37, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, List of Boy's Life Characters. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Boy's Life (novel). Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Boy's Life (novel) – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Fyddlestix (talk) 23:37, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with List of Boy's Life Characters. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. —teb728 t c 06:06, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JLOPO! I've noticed your contributions to Boy's Life (novel) and Back Spin (novel) seems to be overly plot heavy, and lack any real-world context. Please carefully review Manual of Style: Writing about Fiction, as well as Manual of style: Novels. A good encyclopedia article about the book should not have an excessive and exhaustive repetition of every minor detail, but should tactfully summarize the plot as well as what reliable, third party sources (i.e. scholars and book reviewers) have written about the book. You must also be careful not to include your own opinions or interpretations, or the unattributed views of others, per original research. For examples of how to ideally structure, reference, and write high quality articles, you might browse the novel articles identified as Good Articles, e.g. Divergent (novel) or Ender's Game. Cheers, --Animalparty-- (talk) 20:30, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case it is not clear: Do not write book reports on Wikipedia, Always cite sources other than the book itself, and Do not add your own views. --Animalparty-- (talk) 09:15, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I just wanted to let you know that the article you nominated for speedy deletion didn't qualify under WP:A3. I've changed the tag to WP:G12 which I believe is more appropriate. Thanks! --Non-Dropframe _talk 01:10, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article 2015 Bombing of the Cairo Italian Consulate has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

article too short, content can be part of other page/list

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. 178.135.80.2 (talk) 15:23, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Who the hell do you think you are by nominating one of my own subpages for deletion? Fuck off out of my space. Jodosma (talk) 19:42, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jodosma (talk) 19:57, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What is your goal?Xx236 (talk) 10:30, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jlopo. You are new to Wikipedia (WP) editing so I Assume good faith (WP:AGF) but seriously, you can't do edits like this. You have replaced sourced information with what you believe (unsourced) to be correct through personal knowledge. However strongly you may feel, you cannot do that. Personal knowledge is not a Reliable source (WP:RS). As you claim to be related to the pages subject, a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI) also exists.

• It is up to you to provide a WP:RS that contradicts the one provided. (It could be wrong.)
• When you have a dispute with other editors about a particular artice you should discuss it on the relevant Talk Page, in this case Talk:Harry Watson, Jr. where Koplimek (talk · contribs) has left a message [1] about the issue. You need to take part in that talk.

I have added a link there to a possible online (non-WP:RS) source/mention or lead to better source/s. [2] Regards, 220 of ^Borg 04:28, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jlopo I am going to Assume good faith but this article is of an important geographical feature of south Lake County. Please do not request for it's deletion. However thanks for notifying me of some issues with it. I agree it does need some change to wording in parts of it. I have improved it but like you I am new to Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShadowDragon343 (talk • contribs) 19:08, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 17:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure what your talking about. I am innocent of posting inappropriate links, all I have been doing on WP yesterday is splitting the categories Film and Television into subsections for live action and animated so the article was easier to navigate. If there were links they were moved around as well. As a result I didn't know I need to delete any links. I am guessing you could mean the millimetros ones as they are the only ones, but I didn't add them.ShadowDragon343 (talk) 10:11, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Threatening to ban me after going by 10 months with only 1 edit (of which my ban happened after that single edit) doesn't solve things nor is it a good way to get along with other users. I have deleted the links since they don't lead to anything anymore (probably did at one point). A good way to avoid falsely accusing users of an edit they didn't make is to actually study the edit changes and see what they did. I don't know who added the links but it's probably a long gone user.ShadowDragon343 (talk) 10:49, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Amy Anderssen 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/Amy Anderssen until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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.  I dream of horses  If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message  (talk to me) (My edits) @ 05:09, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amy Anderssen. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. Your response to a speedy delete request was to leave a vandalism warning on my talk page and to threaten to make "contact with an administrator" regarding my edit. Not cool. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:23, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JLOPO, I see you've patrolled a few of my newly created pages. I'm not sure how the patrol process works, but, can you please patrol the following pages as well (I don't believe they've been patrolled).

Ethanesulfonic acid

Form 1099-R

Form 1099-K

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Form_1099-r&redirect=no

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Form_1099-k&redirect=no

Jasmine lactone

Thanks! Ethanbas (talk) 00:37, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It should be done. If I missed any please let me know. Thanks. JLOPO (talk) 00:40, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You placed this level 3 warning about disruptive behavior onto User talk:Dnachtwolf. Are you familiar with Wikipedia:WikiProject User warnings? This was a new editor. Please explain yourself. Magnolia677 (talk) 03:45, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stop trolling me https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Trolling. The user was creating deleted pages over again. You can see my lower level warnings on there previous accounts. Stop harassing me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Harassment or action may be taken against your account. I am serious, no more fun and games. JLOPO (talk) 03:48, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also:

• User talk:SuzanneTIME made ONE edit, and you placed a level 4 warning here on their talk page.
• User:PickleG13 removed a speedy delete notice here (as editors are encouraged to do). Yet you placed a level 3 warning here.
• You added a level 3 warning here, and the editor got quite angry with you, just as I did for your misuse of warning templates.

You need to stop this uncivil behavior towards other editors immediately. Magnolia677 (talk) 04:03, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uncivil? Stop harassing me. If you would look lower level warnings were sent to all of those users. The user who created the page should not remove the speedy deletion notice. It is clear your out to get me. I encourage you to stop harassing me. Shadowdragon was the wrong user. I apologized and removed the warnings. Go ask him. Stop your ultracrepidarian behavior immediately. JLOPO (talk) 04:10, 6 September 2016 (UTC

ADDITION: I'm editing here because I'm not fully clear on talk pages. I specifically checked rules before I deleted said notice, and I was wrong about my results. Didn't mean to make waves, and mess up, so I apologize. PickleG13 (talk) 23:50, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello JLOPO. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that you shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1) moments after they are created, as you did at Ammukutty. It is also suggested that pages that might meet CSD A7 criteria not be tagged for deletion immediately after they are created. It's usually best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Please do not tag a newly created movie article like Ammukutty as A1 (no context) or A11 (obviously invented). It seems you are not clear at all about these Speedy tags. Please refrain from tagging new articles on CSD until you have read WP:CSD properly. New editors should not be dissuaded by your irrelevant and absolutely wrong tagging. Please stop. I am pinging Magnolia677 too. Lourdes 07:17, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have read it. I do not appreciate being accused of chasing away users. That article was clearly fictional. Go ahead ping Magnolia677. He has nothing to do with this. He has personally threatened me. Why don't you tell Magnolia677 to not delete articles a few minutes after they are created. He has violated so many polices. Magnolia677's persistent harassment of me must stop. JLOPO (talk) 07:23, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have again speedied Abdul Qodir Jaelani without even basic research. Please read BEFORE. Please do not scare away new editors with your absolutely hasty tagging. Please stop. Lourdes 07:29, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That article does not meet notability standards. JLOPO (talk) 07:31, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I presume you have limited idea of when and how Speedy can be applied. I strongly advise you to immediately stop putting Speedy tabs, failing which I will take your report to ANI. Please confirm that you will stop Speedying articles until you exhibit perfect knowledge of CSD tags. Lourdes 07:37, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop threatening me. I will take you to a ANI for your harassment. I have removed my speedy on that tag and added it as AFD. It was a mistake. You need to stop threatening me.JLOPO (talk) 07:40, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your speedy tagging has the potential of being harassing to new editors. Please confirm that you will stop tagging articles with Speedy tags until you have read WP:CSD properly and can exhibit complete command over the same. Lourdes 07:46, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I said it was a mistake. I am not going to stop anything. I made a mistake and corrected it. Have you ever made a mistake? I don't appreciate being threatened. How would you respond if someone came on to your page and threatened you? If you want to offer some advice I am all for it. Please do no threaten me again. It is just pointless. I would like to have a civil discussion.

I am sorry. That is something that a lot of people on here do not say. I am sorry. My behaviour was inappropriate and I would really like to have a civil discussion.

Thanks JLOPO (talk) 07:57, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. Please do not look at this as a threat but as attempts by editors to protect new editors. I will be following your contributions for the next few days to encourage you to stop tagging articles on speedy until you confirm you have read WP:CSD and understand it particularly well. Also, at any time, if you need my assistance in understanding the implication of any speedy tag, I shall be right by your side providing the explanation. Hope this sounds good to you. Lourdes 08:01, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will be following your contributions. What get's me the most though is that people on here treat everyone like they know nothing. Most people are trying to make things better. The thing is you may not be threatening me but you did treat me like I know nothing. I may not know as much about Wikipedia as you but I may know more than you in other areas as you will know more than me.

Can you explain how people can delete my articles within a few minutes?

I appreciate your help.

Thanks JLOPO (talk) 08:09, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Your articles can be deleted within a few minutes in case they qualify under any WP:CSD category. You need to make a very evident claim of notability within the article to avoid the speedy. For example, a CSD A7 tag does not depend upon sources, but rather on the claim of notability done within the article. Again, the A11 tag can only be put if the article contains a statement or a reference that the creator has "obviously invented" the subject of the article himself. The Hoax tag can only be put if there is absolute confirmation that the article is an attempt to vandalise Wikipedia. Thus, if you wish your articles to not be deleted by speedy, then ensure there is an evident believable claim of notability within the article. If you wish your articles should not be deleted at Afd, then the article should qualify on WP:GNG or WP:SNG. Hope that helps. Lourdes 08:15, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello JLOPO. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Hasan Tijanovic, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: there is content just not in English, . Thank you. -- GB fan 10:42, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello JLOPO. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Tom Wiscombe, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article claims coverage in reliable sources. Thank you. — Sam Sailor 21:57, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions are appreciated, but, in this edit to Amy Anderssen, you removed Articles for deletion notices from articles or removed other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates. This makes it difficult to establish consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:29, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You placed a few notability tags. I just wanted to refer you to this WP:NOLYMPICS. Olympians are automatically notable. DonGuapo (talk) 01:32, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, yes. You need to add more sources to show that these people are in fact notable in connection with the Olympics. Thanks JLOPO (talk) 01:33, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOLYMPICS says "Athletes from any sport are presumed notable if they have competed at the modern Olympic Games, including the Summer Olympics (since 1896) or the Winter Olympics (since 1924), or have won a medal at the Paralympic Games; e.g. Ian Thorpe or Laurentia Tan" Each citation shows they were Olympians. DonGuapo (talk) 01:38, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have confirmed the sources. They comply with WP:NOLYMPICS. The notability tags can be removed. Thanks. JLOPO (talk) 01:41, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I will allow you to remove them. Just wanted to notify you. DonGuapo (talk) 01:43, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. DonGuapo (talk) 01:58, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, as you did at User talk:Magnolia677, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. There is nothing on your talkpage that even faintly resembles a personal attack. Accusing an editor falsely of making personal attacks is itself a personal attack. There are multiple deficiencies in your edits. I'd strongly suggest you reevaluate your position on editor's critiquing your work. They will. I can promise you I'll be reviewing your work on school articles. The contributions on the one I've seen leave much to be desired. John from Idegon (talk) 05:28, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My only warning? I have received no other warnings. He was personally attacking me. The attack was not on my talk page but rather on various edit summaries. Show me where sending an appropriate warning is a personal attack? Do you have any polices to back any of this up?

"There are multiple deficiencies in your edits" Such as what?

I have done nothing wrong.

I will be taking this to the Administrators Noticeboard. JLOPO (talk) 05:33, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have reviewed every contribution made by Magnolia677 on 8 September, the date you warned him and for good measure 7 September also. There is nothing resembling a personal attack anywhere. As for the numetous deficencies in your edits, simply take note of the numerous watmings from several editors you've recieved. You've also threatened to take Magnolia677 to a noticeboard. I'd suggest you do just that in both cases. Beware of low flying boomerangs. John from Idegon (talk) 06:54, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. If you can add any reliable sources and footnotes, that would be awesome and potentially save it from deletion. Canadian Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce is also on AfD for the same reasons. Of course also be sure to participate in the deletion discussions. AfD is not a vote but a consensus/following policy mechanism. Me-123567-Me (talk) 15:26, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most geography, wildlife and women articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 55 African countries, so should be enjoyable! Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African wildlife articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance. If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing any article related to a topic you often work on, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Might be a good way to work on fleshing out articles you've long been meaning to target and get rewarded for it! Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 04:55, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JLOPO. 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]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Hello, JLOPO. 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, JLOPO. 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]