User talk:11987

Welcome!

Hello,, 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: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Irishpunktom\talk 09:50, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Dumbledore speculation
''I am very sorry. I do not know all the rules of Wikipedia and apoligize for any incovenience. However, I wonder why nobody has stopped me from removing speculation from other pages. Can you please explain why that is?''


 * Hi - Well there are different levels of speculation. Some is appropriate for the wikipedia and some is not.  It depends on the context and how it is presented.  For example - posting something like "Dumbledore is NOT dead" or "Snape did NOT kill Dumbledore" or "Dumbledore commanded Snape to kill him" as if these were "facts", would be pure (and probably false) speculation, and thus disallowed.  Posting the fact that there is a lot of controversy over the circumstances of Dumbledore's death, and a brief description of the thinking behind it, may be allowed.  The question boils down to whether the information is factual, useful, and significant to most readers.  I am not a fan of posting pure fan speculation as if it were encyclopedic fact.  But we also need to be careful about anonymously and arbitrarily deleting entire sections of wiki pages, without explanation in the "Edit summary", or at least bringing it up for review in the discussions on the article's "discussion" tab.  These issues are usually discussed at great length in that "discussion" tab you see off each main article, and you are welcome to add your thoughts there.  Since you clearly did not mean to vandalize the Dumbledore article, I'll remove the vandalism warning on your page.  Thanks, and welcome to the Wikipedia, and please feel free to edit wherever you please.  Again, however, it would be helpful to the rest of us if you explain any such non-minor edits in the Edit summary box (or on the discussion page or both) so other editors do not assume you are not just another drive-by vandal who is arbitrarily and maliciously deleting valid information. Thanks again, and have fun! --T-dot 13:37, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * ps - you might want to go back and review your other speculation deletions, and see if there are some that might be candidates for reinstating, or at least candidates for discussing in the respective discussion tabs whether they belong. peace.  --T-dot 13:41, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Re:Personal details
I don't really care, there are hardly any people in India who would do anything sick, AFAIK. Cheers! -- May the Force be with you! Shr e shth91 ($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 09:20, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * What're are you sorry for?! -- May the Force be with you!  Shr e shth91 ($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|)  12:25, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Comments on Usertalk
When you are leaving warnings to other users about vandalistic behaviors, please speak in a formal tone, and don't make threatening remarks. Thanks for your help! --Porqin 17:51, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Re-reading your remarks, it isn't what you said, it is somewhat how you presented it. Saying "Or u will suffer consequences" doesn't give much context to what the consequence will be, before telling them what they have done wrong. Tell them what they have done wrong, then mention consequences, and everything will be alright. (If interested, here are some templates for many situations) Thanks again! --Porqin 18:10, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Blocked?
Im not sure why I wa blocked, but there is no reason for this; i never vandalise pages. Thank you. (11987 10:47, 17 August 2006 (UTC))
 * no info in the logs, you have to give more information. what does the warning say? ST47 10:50, 17 August 2006 (UTC)


 * We can't unblock you at this time, because you haven't given us the information we need to even look into your block. You yourself were not blocked; if you were prevented from editing, you must have been autoblocked or blocked because of your IP address.  I'm removing your unblock request because there's nothing we can do without this information.  If you still want to be unblocked, feel free to add the  tag back to this page, and be sure to include the message you saw when you tried to edit, including the IP address.  This is what the message looks like.  Without that information, we can't help you. ➨  ЯEDVERS  10:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

The reason was 'User:Tuleeprabaht, already block for violation 3RR'

that is obviously not me. what other info is needed? Im new at this. (11987 10:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC))


 * You were never blocked. Someone who shares the same internet address (IP) with you was blocked and that stopped you from editing. I have lifted that block and you should now be able to edit again. Sorry for the inconvenience. To make it easier and quicker if it ever happens again, please remember to include the message you saw when you tried to edit, including the IP address. You didn't do that this time, despite being asked twice, and it slowed down the unblocking process. Thanks. Happy editing! ➨  ЯEDVERS  11:03, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, and sorry for not understanding. Thanks agaun. (11987 11:05, 17 August 2006 (UTC))

Harry Potter book 7 Deletions
Hello. I noticed you deleted a large chunk from this article, arguing it was speculation. The piece included information such as harry becoming 17 on his next birthday, or that the school would need a new dark arts teacher (which has happened in every book so far, and the last one just made a very public exit at the end of the last book). Perhaps you could explain why you feel these points are speculative rather factual highlights from the very substantive background already put in place by the author for the new book. If anything, I feel they might be accused of being rather obvious to anyone familiar with the books. If something has been published by the author in her works to date, then it isn't speculation. Sandpiper 01:16, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, again...
The message seen when I try to edit is this

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by Centrx for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Constant spamming from this range (Bangkok) Your IP address is 203.144.160.250.

If possible, I would prefer to be unblocked. Thanks in advance.

License tagging for Image:121.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:121.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 10:05, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC)