User talk:162.245.166.5

January 2016
Hello, I'm Oshwah. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to The Mark Levin Show— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:24, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Saint Peters Church, Slagelse (January 31)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Saint Peters Church, Slagelse and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Saint_Peters_Church,_Slagelse Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Onel5969&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Saint_Peters_Church,_Slagelse reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

 Onel 5969  TT me 14:08, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Saint Anders of Slagelse has been accepted
 Saint Anders of Slagelse, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!  Onel 5969  TT me 14:11, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Saint_Anders_of_Slagelse help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Saint Leofdag of Ribe (February 1)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Saint Leofdag of Ribe and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Saint_Leofdag_of_Ribe Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SwisterTwister&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Saint_Leofdag_of_Ribe reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister  talk  07:05, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

May 2016
Hello, I'm Mcfar54. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Jenna Marbles has been undone because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.  05:58, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

December 2016
Hello, I'm RSTech1. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Philosophy of perception— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. RSTech1 (talk) 00:26, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Bob Hurley
Writing an encyclopedia means leaving out superlatives and sticking to the bare bone facts. Unless the sources use the same puffed up words you should not be adding such inflated words to the article. You seem to have some skill in editing and should work on improving articles rather than adding content that makes someone seem more important by using inflated words. Editors on Wikipedia call this puffery. So please stop editing like this. Best Regards,
 *  Bfpage  let's talk... 01:13, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

July 2017
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Neuroscience of sex differences has been reverted. Your edit here to Neuroscience of sex differences was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links in references which are discouraged per our reliable sources guideline. The reference(s) you added or changed (http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00915/abstract) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 18:34, 18 July 2017 (UTC) If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.