Hello Rem486 and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your contributions do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can write {{helpme}} below this message along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Again, welcome! - ^theWOLFchild 04:40, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Epistle of James. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Grover cleveland (talk) 14:36, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Say Whaaat? I haven't messed with the article in a dog's age. This is the talk page. I can't talk? Why not just call it the 'Echo Chamber"? And I haven't reverted anything? Maybe it's just that my points are so pointy that they hurt really bad.rem486 '

I've reverted you as this appears to be original research - please read WP:NOR. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 13:11, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And if you continue to add original research after the complaints you've received, I'll come to the conclusion that Wikipedia is not for you and probably block you. Dougweller (talk) 13:14, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Epistle of James, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. This is also an issue of long-term edit-warring. Final warning and I'm being generous here I think. Dougweller (talk) 12:57, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at Talk:Epistle of James, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Aristophanes68 (talk) 22:19, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please do not overwrite WikiProject listings on talkpages as you did with this edit. They are there for a reason. Thank you. — Wyliepedia 06:37, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Epistle of James are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. JudeccaXIII (talk) 16:25, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Condina, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Condina and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Condina 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. Train of Knowledge (talk) 05:10, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Condina, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:36, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rem486. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Condina".

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! UnitedStatesian (talk) 23:32, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Johand199. I noticed that in this edit to Judge Judy, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Johand199 ^{(Talk • Contribs)} 20:10, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]