Engwar

Welcome!

Hello Engwar, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  EdwinHJ | Talk 05:27, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Please sign!

As a courtesy for other editors, it is a Wikipedia guideline to sign your talk page and user talk page posts. To do so simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments and your user name or IP address and the date will be automatically added along with a timestamp. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). For further info read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Thank you. -- Eagle^amn 06:16, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

ISBN Javascript Code

Hi Engwar,

This code will only work if you are logged in. You also may need to clear your cache. There are instructions on how to do this on the top of your monobook.js page. What browser are you using?

Lunchboxhero 13:39, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

It works for me now. Thank you. A human 11:18, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Bush wanted to lure Saddam to shoot down UN plane

That was a completely inappropriate name for an article. I have changed it to Bush-Blair memo which is bad but if you can find a name of what the memo is being called then please change the title to that... but titles should not be accusations. gren グレン ^? 02:30, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Sale of heavy water to Israel

Hi - dont know why you changed the information I added to the article, as its shown here in the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten it was Norwegian heavy water, sold by Norway [[1]], but shipped out from the UK. So the article as it stand is not correct. Ulflarsen 16:24, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

I know, but UK knew it was going to Israel. So just stating Norway sold it is insufficient. A human 17:05, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

AFD

Care to vote?

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scholars for 9/11 Truth (second nomination)

--Striver 20:38, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Daniel Pipes

Thanks for fixing[2] my stuff-up. In doing a couple of copyedits of the article, I noticed an earlier mention of the same column (last para of Daniel_Pipes#Policy_toward_Iraq). (Oops! I should have noticed that earlier.) I did nothing about this duplication myself. Would you like to combine them, or edit the second to mention the first ("In the above-mentioned NYSun article of 28Feb2006, ...), or whatever?

Also, I've suggested on Talk:Daniel Pipes that we delete that quote. I now incline towards keeping it. I take it you want it kept?

—Chris Chittleborough 14:24, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Later: I've had a go at the duplication problem myself. I simply removed the first para, as explained in Talk:Daniel Pipes. If I've been too WP:BOLD, feel free to edit me. I've also changed my vote re that quote to "keep" and declared my micro-poll closed. Cheers, Chris Chittleborough 12:56, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

debka.com

this "mix of real and invented news" line is complitely unfounded. please stop adding it back. WP is not an activist forum. Must stick to facts, must stick to NPOV. LoremImpsum 07:06, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if it offends you. But it is well documented that much of their news is speculation portrayed as facts. A human 01:29, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

its not about me being offended, your claims are as much speculation as the speculation they claim. this is an encyclopedia so it is safer, and proper to stick to hard, confirmed facts. wikipedia is known for being innacurate with controversial issues, plesase do not contribute towards this. LoremImpsum 07:41, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I have looked at most of the websites you started, and the recent changes you have made and the patern i notices is that more often that not you dedicate to incorporate biased and opinonated remarks in politically charged articles. Wikipedia is not a forum for this. Studies have found that wikipedia is accurate with non controversial scientific articles, but not so with politicl ones. You are contributing to this problem.LoremImpsum 01:43, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I saw the edit history of the DEBKA.com page. While such cricism is legitimate if sourced, it cannot be sourced to blogs per WP:RS. Please review this policy. Respectfully, Republitarian 23:42, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

AgentFX

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article AgentFX, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 18:14, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Aviatrix3D

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Aviatrix3D, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 18:14, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Xith3D

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Xith3D, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 18:15, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Spying on the United Nations

I have nominated Spying on the United Nations, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spying on the United Nations. 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Lemmey (talk) 22:59, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

OctLight

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article OctLight, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Gazimoff ^Write_Read 11:46, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Petrodollar warfare article

You were one of the people who were most adamant on the 'keep' side of the AfD for the Petrodollar Warfare article, and thus one of those most likely to have something interesting to say about my proposed changes to it, which are sweeping and somewhat skeptical. Please take a look at my comments on the article's talk page. -Toptomcat (talk) 00:15, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Petrodollar warfare

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Petrodollar warfare. 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/Petrodollar warfare (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) 01:08, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Minarchists

A tag has been placed on Category:Minarchists requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for four days or more and it is not presently under discussion at Categories for discussion, or at disambiguation categories.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to 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 tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Yworo (talk) 16:49, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of White phosphorus use in Iraq for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article White phosphorus use in Iraq 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/White phosphorus use in Iraq 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.

Green547 (talk) 14:59, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)