• User:Redhanker/Maidhc Ó Cathail
• User:Redhanker/sandbox/Veterans Today
• User:Redhanker/sandbox/Richard A. Falk

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Hello, Redhanker, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

• Be Bold!
• Learn from others
• Be kind to others
• Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
• Tell us a bit about yourself
• Our great guide to Wikipedia

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Please sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

We're so glad you're here! Epeefleche (talk) 18:51, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article General Dynamics/Grumman F-111B, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This is particularly important when adding or changing any facts or figures and helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. -MBK₀₀₄ 23:41, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I will add cites later. In the mean time, please tag, don't delete. Information on the tomcat page will confirm F-14 arms fit. Redhanker (talk) 23:50, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to LGBT parenting. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Also, "LGBT practices" do not make semantic sense.Phoenix of9 00:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please be careful with accuracy regarding information added to Wikipedia. Ingmar Guandique was convicted of the assault, not the murder, of two other victims before the Chandra Levy murder case. Also, as Guandique is not notable outside of the Levy case, the article has been merged per WP:ONEEVENT. KimChee (talk) 03:39, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Redhanker. I'm glad to see you working on the Battle of Wanat. It's a good article now, but it can certainly use improvement. I opened a Good Article Review for it some months ago since it had slowly drifted away from the Good Article Criteria as people added information to it. In my opinion, it had lost GA status. I made changes, closed the review, and left the GA status—but the article still needs work. The next logical step would be to take it to Featured Article status. That's not easy (I can tell you from experience), but it would be a worthwhile project.

I had a lot of trouble finding templetes and tools to edit articles when I first arrived here. A few other editors helped me. You can certainly ask questions at the new user talk page. However, feel free to ask at my talk page if you need any help. I'll be happy to help. Happy editing! --Airborne84 (talk) 01:45, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Franklin Lamb. Since you had some involvement with the Franklin Lamb redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). nableezy - 19:20, 4 May 2011 (UTC) 19:20, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Franklin Lamb 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/Franklin Lamb 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. bobrayner (talk) 16:33, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article An Explanatory Memorandum On the General Strategic Goal for the Group In North America 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/An Explanatory Memorandum On the General Strategic Goal for the Group In North America 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. bobrayner (talk) 17:59, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, [[ Quantum_Group_of_Funds ]], has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going [[ Talk:Soros_Fund_Management |here]], and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. HaroldErica (talk) 17:10, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Paul Craig Roberts, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alex Jones (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) 11:58, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Neo-Confederate, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 15:34, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Lockheed C-130 Hercules, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page C-97 (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) 10:58, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Redhanker. You have new messages at Valfontis's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Roshonara Choudhry 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/Roshonara Choudhry 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 template from the top of the article.

Note: I am not the AfD nominator. I just happened to notice that the notification of the AfD went to the editor who created the article as a redirect, rather than as an actual article. This notification is to correct that.

TJRC (talk) 17:06, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	I hear-by award Redhanker this Barnstar for his creation and development of the Roshonara Choudhry article, a previously neglected and much needed topic. I hope Redhanker continues their work on it to the same high standards in future. Shakehandsman (talk) 01:13, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thank you much for the recognition. Too bad that neo-confederate and Franklin Lamb did not withstand deletion nominations Redhanker (talk) 01:17, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I'm not really familiar with either of those other two issues I'm afraid so can't give you much advice there. A comment on the AFD was that he wasn't notable "yet" so it may well be that you jumped the gun slightly and you may have more success in future should there be some more coverage in reliable sources. There's no doubt it's far less clear cut and less notable than the Choudry article. Talking of which, you're obviously very interested in it, so I suggest you keep it on your watch-list if it isn't there already. In addition to this AFD some completely legitimate content you wrote was also removed by an anonymous editor last year and no one noticed it's removal, so it clearly needs keeping an eye on.--Shakehandsman (talk) 02:04, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The AFD has closed as "keep" with unanimous opposition to its deletion. You can't get a better endorsement than that.--Shakehandsman (talk) 19:24, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thank you for your work on Hilary Rosen . It's so nice to go to bed concerned about an article and wake up to find it fixed! Thank you. HectorMoffet (talk) 19:49, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, it's nice to wake and find that good deeds are appreciated instead of punished. I'm convinced that this was Obama's way of getting at traditional values promoted by Romney's controversial church without looking like that was what he was doing. Redhanker (talk) 19:57, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Two Barnstars on the same day, very impressive!--Shakehandsman (talk) 21:01, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Bench seat, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shifter (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) 10:49, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Congratulations, Redhanker, you've recently made your 1,000th edit to articles on English Wikipedia! Thank you for creating, improving, and expanding biographies and other articles, and for all your contributions to the encyclopedia! Keep up the great work! Maryana (WMF) (talk) 18:10, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Catetory:pro-Iranism requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. TeaganK (talk) 22:25, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why was this speedy deleted? It is a category so it doesn't need any content, just an explanation of what it is. Could you please restore it? An article does exist for the term, this would be a category. Redhanker (talk) 22:46, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus has developed that in most cases articles should not be tagged for deletion under this criterion moments after creation as the creator may be actively working on the content; This clearly does not apply to category: articles:

A3. No content. Any article (other than disambiguation pages, redirects, or soft redirects) consisting only of external links, category tags and "see also" sections, a rephrasing of the title, attempts to correspond with the person or group named by its title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, chat-like comments, template tags, and/or images. This also applies to articles consisting entirely of the framework of the Article wizard with no additional content beyond the above. However, a very short article may be a valid stub if it has context, in which case it is not eligible for deletion under this criterion. Similarly, this criterion does not cover a page having only an infobox, unless its contents also meet the above criteria. Caution is needed when using this tag on newly created articles. {{db-a3}}, {{db-nocontent}}, {{db-contact}}, {{db-empty}} Consensus has developed that in most cases articles should not be tagged for deletion under this criterion moments after creation as the creator may be actively working on the content; though there is no set time requirement, a ten-minute delay before tagging under this criterion is suggested as good practice. Please do not mark the page as patrolled prior to that suitable delay passing, so that the wait does not result in the article escaping review at a later time.

(talk page stalker) The article Pro-Iranism has never been deleted. Category:Pro-Iranism has never been deleted. It is just conceivable that you are talking about Catetory:pro-Iranism which obviously qualified for speedy deletion as a straightforward spelling mistake. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 01:21, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Entirely correct - thanks RHaworth. The article contained a typo (Catetory) and therefor ended up in the article space rather then the category space which is why i removed it. Seems that the editor who tagged it with a CSD template used an A3 tag as opposed to a G6 tag (Housekeeping) it was supposed to have. Twinkle automatically uses a CSD template's warning during a page removal, thus the somewhat incorrect removal summary. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 06:37, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect America First Books. Since you had some involvement with the America First Books redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Dougweller (talk) 18:40, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Mark Dankof, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Constitution Party (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) 15:06, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there Redhanker ... You really need a specific citation in order to claim that Yockey 'revered Hitler'. I have read most [or all?] of Yockey's [important] writings, and have never seen any evidence to support what you say. By way of contrast, Yockey does praise Mussolini, but Hitler is never mentioned at all in "Imperium", nor in any of Yockey's "Four Essays", etc. (I have,incidentally, had an article accepted by "Comparative Civilizations Review" (USA) which quotes Yockey quite extensively). Regards, --DLMcN (talk) 05:30, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This section of code was taken directly from another article in Wikipedia which has been there quite a long time. I don't think there are any credible sources to support the claim he did not revere hitler, rather most sources indicate he was a seminal neo-Nazi if not an actual Nazi agent according to some reports. That he continues to influence people still active in politics such as David Duke and Willis Carto makes Yockey and his views, particularly towards National Socialism, of considerable importance today. Redhanker (talk) 13:33, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying > [I do not deny your very last sentence^]. What "other article" in Wikipedia are you referring to? ... I would be interested to see what sources it uses. Wikipedia procedures require that we quote 'reliable citations' in order to make a point - rather than the other way around - (i.e., we are not justified in assuming something purely on the grounds that nobody has asserted the contrary). However - surely the fact that Yockey never ever mentions Hitler - anywhere in his writings - is evidence that (like Spengler) Yockey had reservations about him?

So I am going to remove those claims from the main article: (I did something similar some months ago). I hope it does not lead to an edit-war with you ... rather, let us see what other editors say. I will also copy this discussion into the Yockey Talk-File. Regards --DLMcN (talk) 16:12, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pro-Iranism, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 11:43, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited List of ZF transmissions, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ford 500 (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) 11:50, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Willis Carto, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:41, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Mark Dankof has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Sources do not appear to establish notability of subject. Just collection of this individual's fringe viewpoints.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Plot Spoiler (talk) 15:57, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Redhanker. You are invited to join WikiProject Brands, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of brands and brand-related topics. To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:57, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Pro-Iranian sentiments requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Keφr 21:28, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To you and yours, Have a Merry ______ (fill in the blank) and Happy New Year! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:05, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you 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.

Note also this article is 1RR. You did not discuss my revert on the talk page before reverting it. Please read WP:BRD for proper way to edit. I will open a section now. CarolMooreDC 21:41, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mark Dankof 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/Mark Dankof 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 template from the top of the article. Location (talk) 22:25, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to quote me in WP:RSN, but don't repost my post. It makes it look like I am responding to your post there with those comments. Location (talk) 17:15, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Maidhc Ó Cathail requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Plot Spoiler (talk) 07:10, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Habilian Association 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/Habilian Association 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 template from the top of the article. Plot Spoiler (talk) 05:39, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your editing habits. Wikipedia:No_original_research/Noticeboard#Consistent_WP:OR.2FWP:RS_violator. CarolMooreDC 20:57, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. PamD 15:40, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the policy on WP:Biographies of living persons, which includes:

"Contentious material about living persons... that is unsourced or poorly sourced – whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable – should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion."

Even with sourcing, see also the sections WP:BLPCRIME and WP:BLP1E. JohnCD (talk) 15:52, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia article talk pages are for discussing what reliable sources have published about the subject of the article and how we can use them to improve the article not for making rants about big media conspiracy theories. The reason the article Frank Marshall Davis does not contain a huge section on Obama is because the article is about Frank Marshall Davis and not about Obama. Obama had Zero impact on Davis' life and work and the only evidence that Obama caught communism from Davis is in the most wing nut of fringe conspiracy theories, but no reliable sources. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:18, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Genesis Communications Network, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jason Lewis (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) 19:11, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Redhanker. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Politically related deaths of Iranians. Thank you. VQuakr (talk) 06:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited James H. Fetzer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ADL (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) 12:22, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I must ask you to stop your ethnic Wikipedia:Edit warring on the page. I will create a report should you still do it. Again, once many sources say the shooter was a terrorist and this was a terror plot at the school, I will back you 100%. Kennvido (talk) 04:19, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Kennvido. A (not yet extant) biographical article about Zawahri may be the place to put observations (supported by reliable sources) about his background, and popular (not fringe) theories about his motivations/influences. Maybe you should consider starting one? The article about the Santa Monica event itself doesn't seem the place for this kind of detail, and certainly not for unsupported speculation about its cause(s). In any case, repeated reposting of the same kind of items/info when the consensus of other major contributors to this article seems to be against it isn't constructive (and violates the collaborative spirit of Wiki). Dwpaul (talk) 04:39, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of material out there relevant to reactions to this event. The fact that promiment Muslim pundits are complaining about all the inappropriate talk about Arab and Muslim terrorism means that this is notable enough to discuess in the article in the spirit of balance, and clearing it up in wikipedia as a reference will help clear up the confusion.

There is absolutely no difference between this attack and the other attack on an Israeli school by an Arab gunman other than everybody knows one was motivated by the Arab / Israeli conflict, and the other everybody pretends it has nothing to do with shooting a lot of innocent people. The whole killing the father and brother is seperate for any motive for going on a terrorist attack spree. Redhanker (talk) 04:47, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Last time I checked, Wikipedia wasn't intended as a reference to complaints by pundits about inappropriate talk. It's an encyclopedia. To your second point, so far the only thing the events you mention have in common is the ethnicity of the shooter (and we're still unsure to what degree his ethnicity was a major part of his identity). To lump them together because of that alone is no more appropriate than creating linkages of all crimes committed by Catholics or by people with red hair. Dwpaul (talk) 04:57, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redhanker, I hope you will see that your OWN personal feelings are entering the article. Your opinion is skewing your entries. Once that light goes off, you will see. And you starting your own article is a great idea. Then you will see what many have to say. Kennvido (talk) 05:11, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was serious when I suggested you might start a bio page on Zawahri. I might not (very likely won't) agree with everything you introduce there, but at least IMHO it would belong there. Be prepared for it, however, to become a vector for extremists on all sides of these questions. Dwpaul (talk) 12:33, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In the mean time, if Zawahri had an agenda (other than suicide), it seems he missed his best and last opportunity to let us know what it was. http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/14/us/california-santa-monica-gunman/index.html?hpt=hp_t2 -- Dwpaul (talk) 22:32, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Police believe the attack was pre-meditated because of the amount of preparation, but they did not believe Zawahri was connected to any terrorist organizations whether domestic for international. ^{[1] [2]} John Zawahri's parents were immigrants from Lebanon, a nation torn by war and conflict^[3][4]

The American Muslim was critical of a number of bloggers who tried to associate the tragedy with Muslims, Arabs and terrorism. TAM and other websites noted a source that stated the Zawahri family belonged to the "Antiochian Orthodox Christian Church", and confirmed that that Zawahri was a Christian who parents came from Lebanon.^[5][6]

One conservative blogger Debbie Schlussel tied the incident to Arab immigrants by comparing it to another carjacking / shooting spree by comparing it to the February 19, 2013 rampage of Ali Sayed who murdered 3 and wounded others before killing himself. ^[7]

Dr Nancy Hartevelt Kobri noted that Zawahri is an alternative spelling of the surname of Ayman, the head of Al Qaeda, though Ayman is Egyptian. Ziad Jarrah of the 9/11 attacks also grew up in Lebanon and attended a Catholic School. She believes there was a lethal combination when mixed with a history of mental illness and domestic violence, calling one of a series of "hybrid transformational terrorist acts". ^[8] The incident also has spawned its own conspiracy theories that the casualties were a hoax, sometimes from the websites that promoted Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting conspiracy theories ^[9][10]

Hello, Redhanker. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 02:21, 15 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

The article Murder of Joseph Griffin has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:ONEEVENT

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. TKK ^{bark !} 13:15, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Murder of Joseph Griffin 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/Murder of Joseph Griffin 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. TKK ^{bark !} 20:43, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my comments at that link. Bearian (talk) 17:54, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Debbie Schlussel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Syed Ali (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) 11:04, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Timeline of Zanzibar City history may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on .

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• and Kirstie Trup from the UK are injured by an acid attack by men on a moped near Stone Town <ref>[ http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/zanzibar-acid-attack-recap-updates-2143076 Zanzibar acid

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:31, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fuaed Abdo Ahmed 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/Fuaed Abdo Ahmed 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. Signalizing (talk) 22:08, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mashregh News 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/Mashregh News 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. Transcendence (talk) 02:00, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article James Seevakumaran 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/James Seevakumaran 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. Transcendence (talk) 02:06, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Khalid Ali-M Aldawsari 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/Khalid Ali-M Aldawsari 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. Transcendence (talk) 02:08, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paul Sheldon Foote 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/Paul Sheldon Foote 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. Transcendence (talk) 02:11, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Transcendence (talk) 02:40, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fish bomb 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/Fish bomb 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. Transcendence (talk) 18:56, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Redhanker,

I've noticed you've been making comments of a personal and speculative nature regarding my edits. I would appreciate it if you cease making such statements and consider Wikipedia:Assume good faith as well as WP:PERSONAL (specifically "Criticisms of, or references to, personal behavior in an inappropriate context, like on a policy or article talk page, or in an edit summary, rather than on a user page or conflict resolution page."). Thanks. Transcendence (talk) 18:53, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Antoinette Tuff 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/Antoinette Tuff 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. Transcendence (talk) 19:50, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Redhanker, You've made personal comments again at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antoinette Tuff, specifically "Will you please stop trying to delete articles about terrorist attacks? ... Sooner or later other people will notice the pattern of deletions." as well as "What is your real agenda here, it's certainly does not look look improving the usefulness of Wikipedia since there are thousands of people who want to look up information on the woman and this incident." I ask you again to keep these comments to user talk pages per WP:PERSONAL. Transcendence (talk) 21:48, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Category:George Soros, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Transcendence (talk) 22:34, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, and thanks for trying to improve the outline of motorcycles and motorcycling. Outlines don't include news events as a rule so it's been reverted by other editors. WikiProject Motorcycling is in the process of creating a new article on motorcycle hooliganism, maybe you can wait until that's created and contribute the content there? — Brianhe (talk) 20:25, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ok I see this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dennis_Bratland/Motorcycle_hooliganism Redhanker (talk) 21:50, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that is the draft; I expect it to become a full fledged article in days to weeks. Brianhe (talk) 22:39, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Redhanker/sandbox/Veterans Today, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Redhanker/sandbox/Veterans Today and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Redhanker/sandbox/Veterans Today during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Dougweller (talk) 15:15, 8 August 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) 14:22, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment may indeed have merit. The editor who started that hasty AFD may have acted in good faith - yesterday this did look like an intemperate student shooting his professor. But I think his editing record and aggressive attitude bears examination, I have tried to call him on it on his talk page, although he often deleted comments calling attention to his behavior. He is certainly in a category of editors who wish to minimize, obscure violent attacks. And, unlike most of us, appears to have the resources to devote many hours every day to editing.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:27, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You should look at List of school shootings in the United States it has now been revised to " excludes incidents that occurred during wars or police actions, as well as murder-suicides by rejected suitors or estranged spouses, and suicides or suicide attempts involving only one person. Mass shootings by staff of schools that involve only other employees (such as famous Amy Bishop case) are covered at workplace killings. A lot of significant attacks and plots have been deleted if you check the edit history Redhanker (talk) 20:02, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Redhanker. 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]

Hello, Redhanker. 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, Redhanker. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Maidhc Ó Cathail".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:23, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Redhanker. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Kourosh Ziabari".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:29, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Khalid Ali-M Aldawsari 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/Khalid Ali-M Aldawsari (2nd nomination) 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. John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:07, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Third Terrorist 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/The Third Terrorist 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.

Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 22:38, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]