Oh babe

Welcome!

Hello, Oh babe, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as TV Episodes Considered The Greatest of All Time, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard. Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

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! Xenocide^{Talk|Contributions} 04:07, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of TV Episodes Considered The Greatest of All Time

A tag has been placed on TV Episodes Considered The Greatest of All Time 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. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Xenocide^{Talk|Contributions} 04:07, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

AfD Nomination: TV Episodes Considered The Greatest of All Time

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but all Wikipedia articles must meet our criteria for inclusion (see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Since it does not seem that TV Episodes Considered The Greatest of All Time meets these criteria, an editor has started a discussion about whether this article should be kept or deleted.

Your opinion on whether this article meets the inclusion criteria is welcome. Please contribute to the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TV Episodes Considered The Greatest of All Time. Don't forget to add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of each of your comments to sign them.

Discussions such as these usually last seven days. In the meantime, you are free to edit the content of the article. Please do not remove the "articles for deletion" template (the box at the top). When the discussion has concluded, a neutral third party will consider all comments and decide whether or not to delete the article. Maccy69 (talk) 01:51, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

I've just put this on the article's talk page and I'm repeating it here:

I've nominated this for deletion because I don't think it can be made into an encyclopedic article. I seriously suggest you take some time to read and understand Wikipedia's policies before working any further on this article. If it is deleted, you can ask an admin to copy it to you user space if you want to continue to work on it, to make it a suitable article. Anyway, please take the time to understand the policies. I'd suggest starting with WP:YFA and WP:OR and WP:V. It's probably worth taking a look at WP:NOT as well. Cheers. Maccy69 (talk) 02:27, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Pifeedback

Pifeedback

Could you give your opinion on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Pifeedback.com?ChaosMaster16 (talk) 13:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

Greatest American Athletes

Please do provide in-lined references for those additions; if unreferenced, they may well be removed right away. Materialscientist (talk) 07:35, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

July 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Friends appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this important core policy. Thank you. Theleftorium ^(talk) 09:07, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello... sorry to say that your recent edits have been reverted. Generally speaking, we avoid adding those sort of list results to multiple articles, as there are so many different lists with little or nothing in the way of standardized criteria. Thanks. --Ckatz^chat_spy 08:27, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Again, please stop adding these lists. Thanks. --Ckatz^chat_spy 09:26, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Apr 2011

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Fantasia (film), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. MarnetteD | Talk 12:47, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Please stop adding unreferenced controversial biographical content to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Jessica Alba. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. MarnetteD | Talk 12:47, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies concerning neutral point of view and biographies of living persons will not be tolerated. --Bongwarrior (talk) 06:22, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

October 2011

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring, persistent re-addition of extremely poor sourcing and generally combative editing as exemplified by this edit summary, as you did at The Simpsons. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:41, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Oh babe (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I want to understand what I did further, and I don't understand why I was blocked. I was acknowledging a television series which is CLEARLY one of the greatest of all time as one of the greatest of all time, and citing several sources. I mean, if articles like "The Sopranos", "Friends", and "Mary Tyler Moore" say that, why shouldn't the Simpsons? I mean I'm surprised that on the article, it doesn't say that anywhere. And please tell me about how I poorly sourced my information as well because I would sure like to learn a lot more about that. So just respond to this as soon as u can. Oh babe (talk) 00:53, 9 December 2011 (UTC)oh_babe

Decline reason:

This account is not blocked. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 01:21, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.