Please note: Comments left by anonymous editors may be removed without warning. Please create an account or log in if you wish to engage in a meaningful discussion.

• Archive 1, Archive 2, Archive 3.

welcome back, hope u had a good break Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 03:16, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to see you back. – Chacor 05:06, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back! Hope you're still here to see this. You don't seem to have made any edits since the 14th - Mike | Talk 20:14, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Me too - good to see the familiar name popup in the block log. --pgk 22:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw you reverting something on my watch list--great to see you again! Mackensen (talk) 00:04, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Your service to Wikipedia is most deserving of this barnstar. Good job! Sharkface217 21:35, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the barnstar, still warming back up.  :-) Hall Monitor 20:51, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am Balzac Te'baghar, the computer teacher at MoHigh. I want to teach my students how to effectively spread their citing knowledge by giving an assignment of pre-selected wiki pages where they must enhance it by adding at least 3 details and 2 sources. I will NOT tolerate ANY vandalism. I ask that you lift the edit ban of 163.150.137.68 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) from Thursday, September 6 until Friday, September 14. Thank you - Balzac Te'baghar.

You were the last to block 38.116.200.10 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), not for the first time, obviously. I recall setting the block parameters to only block out IP edits indefinitely, which shouldn't have caused an autoblock of Rayquaza2233 (talk · contribs) (which caused the removal of my original indefinite block and leads us to your "September 2007" block). Without giving too much away, I know about that specific IP address, and I feel that it should be permanently blocked for an indefinite amount of time. I can almost guarantee that not one week after your block expires, it will be blocked again. I applaud the efforts to get the whole school vandalism issue fixed , but nothing will ever be achieved. If anything, we're doing them a favour keeping their IP blocked for good. In the mean time, September 2007 is more than sufficient. --Jay(Reply) 02:37, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I look into it even more, Netsnipe (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)(who is unfortunately on break at this time) made an error in unblocking the IP, given that Rayquaza2233 (talk · contribs) is a vandal. This is starting to look fishy. --Jay(Reply) 02:40, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would you support the concept of moving the Earhart "myths" to a separate page or article? The reason for my suggesting this is that the main article should be an accurate and scholarly work while the speculation and conspiracy theories surrounding the disappearance of Amelia Earhart are interesting, they belong in a unique section. Most researchers, as you know, discount the many theories and speculation that has arisen in the years following her last flight. Go onto the Earhart discussion page and register your vote/comments...and a Happy New Year to you as well. Bzuk 05:02 3 January 2007 (UTC).

the IP adress 216.20.9.22 that you blocked is part of the Weston Public School system. this ip is shared by a wide variety of users. if you could please unblock it, id really appreciate it. Gamersedge 16:10, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was hoping to get your advice.

I added to the Ronald Ryan article. Ryan was the last man hanged in Australia (in 1967). What I added was evidence of his guilt. They were confessions he is described as having made in public. One was recorded by his priest (who was not his confessor). I gave my sources for the additions. The primary sources are trial transcripts and interviews with witnesses. They are listed in a secondary source. I gave both.

That whole section has been removed by a user who either has no account or did not log in (124.191.180.110) who simply removed it all on this basis:

“deleted "alleged" confessions made by one author of many books, which cannot be proven. Ryan and Ryan's defense attorneys absolutely dispute this "35-year-later" allegation of guilt”

See here

I could

• Revert (and possibly start an edit war)
• Discuss it on the talk page. However, I don't relish the thought of attempting to discuss something with a user who won't open an account and who has made half a dozen edits, all on the same general topic.
• something else.

What do you advise? Avalon 01:40, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(I forgot to sign the first time, sorry)

Hi, Hall Monitor, and congratulations on your contributions to Wikipedia. I was wondering if you could do something to stop 207.63.215.24 from making edits on Wikipedia. This unregistered user has not only offended people with his immoral edits, but he has also defaced Wikipedia's reputation as a trustworthy online information portal. I came to you because I know how much you care about making Wikipedia as informative as possible. I am prepared to work in as many ways as possible to keep these creeps off of this "information powerhouse." If you click on the highlighted IP address located earlier in the article, a page will load that lists all of the edits this user has made, most of which are demeaning and derogatory. Thank you in advance, and don't hesitate to leave me a message on my "discussion" page. --HG707 23:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Back in 2005 you blocked 198.86.93.254 at the request of the school the IP belongs to. I got a request from that school to unblock it that appears legit. I can't tell if you are still active, so I am leaving this note, but I will unblock tomorrow if I don't hear from you otherwise. --agr (talk) 21:38, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Martin Lee Anderson mugshot.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 03:24, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Michael Storey (cinematographer), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Storey (cinematographer). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Skomorokh 16:09, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article you created, Michael_Storey_(cinematographer) maybe deleted from Wikipedia.

There is an ongoing debate about whether your article should be deleted here:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael_Storey_(cinematographer).

The faster your respond, the better chance the article you created can be saved. This is because deletion debates only stay open for a few days, and the first comments are usually the most important.

There are several tools and other editors who can help you keep the page from being deleted forever:

1. You can list the page up for deletion on Article Rescue Squadron. If you need help listing your page, add a comment on the .
2. You can request a mentor to help explain to you all of the complex rules that editors use to get a page deleted, here: Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. But don't wait for a mentor to respond on the deletion page.
   
3. When try to delete a page, veteran editors love to use a lot of rule acronyms. Don't let these acronyms intimidate you.
   Here is a list of your own acronyms you can use yourself: WP:Deletion debate acronyms which may support the page you created being kept.
   Acronyms in deletion debates are sometimes incorrectly used, or ignore rules or exceptions.
4. You can merge the article into a larger or better established article on the same topic.

If your page is deleted, you still have many options available. Good luck! travb (talk) 21:43, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I'm part of a research group at the University of Washington (Seattle campus), and my group is reaching out to Wikipedians in the Puget Sound area. We're hosting a focus group designed to gather information on what Wikipedians would like to know about each other when interacting on Wikipedia. Our end goal is to create an embedded application that helps people quickly know more about others' history and activity on Wikipedia, and we feel our design will be much more useful if it's based on insights of users like you.

I'm hoping that the chance to help out local researchers, to engage in lively face-to-face discussion with other Seattle Wikipedians, and to contribute to Wikipedia in a new way will entice you to join us. The session lasts 2 hours and snacks are provided. Sessions will be held on UW Seattle campus - directions will be sent after registration. Your contribution will be greatly appreciated!

Willing and able to help us out? RSVP here. Want to know more? Visit our user talk page . Please help us contact other local Wikipedians, too! Commprac01 (talk) 03:04, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Julia DeMato. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julia DeMato (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Washington-user!! What do you think of this category?
Either on a scale of 1-10 or with commentary.
Let me know through the "Special:EmailUser/" section. #TTiT# 12:03, 14 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by The-Traveller-in-Tacoma (talk • contribs)

Hello Hall Monitor! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 4 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 3 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Scott Erickson - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Elizabeth Fishel - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. Loren Toews - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
4. Ben Petrick - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 22:08, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Renato M. E. Sabbatini (2nd nomination). You participated in the first AfD. - Eastmain (talk) 17:51, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Julia DeMato. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julia DeMato (3rd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:10, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Daniel Joseph Sheehan has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

subject lacks "significant independent coverage" in reliable sources and is therefore not notable under the general notability guideline

While all 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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Anotherclown (talk) 09:16, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 07:19, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 03:40, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. WilliamH (talk) 21:08, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Kelvin Darnell Martin mugshot.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:14, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Kelvin Darnell Martin mugshot.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:56, 6 March 2014 (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) 13:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Greetings, admin. Please wear this badge with pride. ThatDislikedOne (talk) 10:30, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]