Mua27

		Cookies!
		Time to try other editing approaches. Jack Merridew 10:32, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

October 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article V (2009 TV series), please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This 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. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 11:04, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Mua27, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• 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 ~~~~, which will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

JamesBWatson (talk) 11:17, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

You appear to have been making test edits at Elizabeth Mitchell. Even if you eventually finish up with an acceptable version this is not helpful, as in the intervening time users coming to the article will have found an unacceptable version of it. Please use the WP:Sandbox for test edits. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:17, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to List of V (2009 TV series) episodes. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 20:03, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Please stop adding unreferenced material to the Elizabeth Mitchell article. The information does not belong unless it is sourced to a reliable source. If you continue adding the information you may be blocked for disruptive editing. Also rumors never belong in the article ~~ GB fan ~~ 12:43, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Christopher Soldevilla

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

A tag has been placed on Christopher Soldevilla requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} at the top of the article, immediately below the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate), and providing your reasons for contesting on the article's talk page, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

You may want to read the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. JNW (talk) 20:14, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

We don't do "There have been rumors that... " 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. Users who constantly or egregiously violate this policy may be blocked from editing." JohnCD (talk) 21:32, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

November 2010

Please do not add unsourced content, as you did to Elizabeth Mitchell. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. IMDB is not considered a reliable source - see WP:RS/IMDB for why. Tabercil (talk) 13:55, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Seconded; you need to stop this, and I suggest you not focus on just this article. Jack Merridew 22:45, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

*cough* — You did it, again; you're being WP:disruptive and risk being block for persisting at it. Jack Merridew 16:27, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

and again ;( Jack Merridew 16:30, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Evangeline Lilly has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 17:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

You need to start changing your approach. Start by answering posts on your talk page. I've just revered a fistful of inappropriate edits of yours and will continue to do so until you respond. Jack Merridew 14:40, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

December 2010

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. DMacks (talk) 09:47, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

February 2011

Please pay more attention to WP:BLP, WP:RS, and the warnings you have received from other editors. You recent edits to Elizabeth Mitchell and related articles were completely inappropriate. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 18:14, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Actually I disagree. It is sharing information that the actress is possibly having an affair and that is something that the reader should be informed about. I know that it is un confirmed and can understand how that is inappropriate but I don't believe that you can call it 'completely inappropriate' as it is information about Elizabeth Mitchell.

Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at Elizabeth Mitchell. Your edits have been reverted or removed.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in you being blocked from editing. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 18:24, 28 February 2011 (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) 14:26, 24 November 2015 (UTC)