Sccosel

Hi Sccosel. Edits from 63.206.157.104 have now been reattributed to you. Regards — Kate Turner | Talk 03:12, 2004 Sep 4 (UTC)

Same for 68.99.182.143. Regards — Kate Turner | Talk 03:29, 2004 Sep 4 (UTC)

You said: "Why did you delete the external link to Who's Alive and Who's Dead on the Celebrity page? What Wikipedia Policy did it violate? I think it is quite informative as to whether or not a celebrity is alive or dead."

The information is (or should be) already available in the Wikipedia itself. See WP:EL for the policy that it violated. --Yamla 02:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

You said: "So, let me understand something... An external link that would be useful to all readers of an article can't be used if it "should be" on Wikipedia, but isn't? The person that updates the information on the webpage pointed to by this external link is extremely prompt in keeping it updated. S/he just isn't doing it on Wikipedia. So, just because they aren't maintaining constantly changing information on Wikipedia, the link shouldn't be in Wikipedia? And, what gives you the right to "police" (or maybe even a harsher word is in order) Wikipedia?"

Did you read WP:EL? Also, please see Category:Living People and Category:Dead people. --Yamla 03:28, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

January 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. One or more of the external links you added in this edit to Pacific Electric Railway do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. You may wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Mjquin_id (talk) 02:10, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

To Mjquin... The current Corralitas Red Car Property external link on this page is dead. I was attempting to link to historic brochures at the new link. I cannot legally copy (historic) material content that I don't own. So you would rather maintain a dead, crappy link, than to have an up to date VALID link associated with this article? Unbelievable.

It was not my intent. But, "blogspot" is a dubios source...see WP:VERIFY...Maybe find a better source? Again, my apologies. -- Mjquin_id (talk) 02:37, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

To Mjquin... So your answer is... Do NOTHING!? Just because you don't like "blogspot" as a part of the URL? That is where the content is. There is no other source. We should be lucky that this material resurfaced. By your action, you have reverted back to a dead link, www.redcarproperty.com. Why? Just because you don't like "blogspot" does not invalidate the content. LOOK AT THE HISTORIC CONTENT, before you rush to judgement. Do us all a favor and revert it back. If not, what is the appeal process on Wikipedia?

My response was to try an find another source; which it seems you have tried to do. You should read WP:AGF. I did not rush anything. People attempt to add blogs all the time, but they are not a reliable source. WP maintains the policy, I do not. You could remove the dead link.

As for resolution, I am reluctant to leave a URL such as this. It IS an external URL to an otherwise good article. Perhaps you could simply include some of the more interesting content from the link directly into the article? You could review it with an admin, by going to the Admin Noticeboard, or simply by placing {{adminhelp}} on either your talkpage or the one for the article. You might also see if you is on-line. I do apologize that this has irritating you, but do hope you will continue being an editor and learn the procedures. I learn things everyday. It has taken me a while (and we are all still rookies). Cheers! -- Mjquin_id (talk) 03:58, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Sccosel. 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)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Sccosel. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)