User talk:198.103.152.52

Doctor Who DVD Numbering
Hi, I've reverted your changes to the numbering of the DVDs in Doctor Who DVD releases. The current numbering deliberately follows the R1 DVD releases, as the article says:

The Region 1 classic series DVDs are labelled with story numbers, which are listed below. The numbering system follows that used in the 1995 reference work The Discontinuity Guide. It differs slightly from that used by Doctor Who Magazine (the source for the Wikipedia list of Doctor Who serials) by: firstly, including the uncompleted serial Shada; and, secondly, counting the four segments of The Trial of a Time Lord as four separate stories. Because of this, both schemes are identical until the 108th story, The Horns of Nimon, after which they diverge. The Region 1 DVDs of the 2005 revival of Doctor Who do not have story numbers, so none are listed here.

Please don't change them again without first establishing a consensus here or here. Thanks. Maccy69 (talk) 18:09, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * mY nUMBERIN FOLLOW ALL OF WIKI
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Doctor_Who_serials
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlightenment_(Doctor_Who) fOR eXEMPLE sAYS 127


 * Does this mean The other ones needs to be changed
 * For exemple 143c for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror_of_the_Vervoids


 * The Region 1 DVD releases use a different numbering system, so the DVD list follows that. The differences are explained in Doctor Who DVD releases and List of Doctor Who serials and all of the affected individual episode pages (there's a footnote next to each episode number). There is no official numbering scheme, so this is the best way we've so far managed to deal with differences between the R1 DVD releases and the list of stories in Doctor Who Magazine 407. The consensus on this is here - if you want to suggest something new, then you need to add to that discussion, not discuss it here or on my talk page, see WP:BRD. For more discussion on this issue, see here. Maccy69 (talk) 18:41, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Examples of footnotes: Enlightenment, Terror of the Vervoids. Maccy69 (talk) 18:53, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

List of Metro systems
Please justify the addition of the O-train first. Thanks. -- Eraserhead1 &lt;talk&gt; 17:02, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

May 2010
Your addition has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. -Andrew c [talk] 16:56, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

There is nothing on that site that states it is copyrighted. Really, you should take a look before you go deleting something that goes against your beliefs. Just because you're pro-abortion doesn't mean that you shouldn't be objective, or at least give the appearance of objectivity.


 * Under US law, everything is automatically copyrighted. For us to accept material verbatim from websites, that website MUST have a licensing statement that is compatible with Wikipedia's free licensing. Alternatively, the website owner could e-mail us a WP:CONSENT form. But more importantly, we have to realize that it is often best to simply summarize content in our own words in an encyclopedic manner. Not every single webpage in the word is writing encyclopedia articles, so if we copy content verbatim into an encyclopedia article, we may have tone and style issues. Finally, I know some users have raise concerns about citing HLI due to neutrality issues. That is a whole nother can of worms that I don't want to get into at this point, but just thought you may want to review some of that past discussions regarding this. Anyway, the key factor at this point is we cannot accept content from webpages due to copyright concerns. Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted. Encyclopedic content must be verifiable. Hope this helps. -Andrew c [talk] 15:00, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Furthermore, I believe you should take a look before you steal content . Clearly they are making a claim to copyright, and charge fees for reprinting in pro-life sources and such. Bottom of the page, clear as day, says Copyright © 2003-2005 LifeNews.com. All rights reserved. -Andrew c [talk] 15:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Fine, I've made that mistake and I didn't steal it. But I noticed that you deleted the whole thing, not just the small quote from Lifesitenews. Why is that? The rest of it is not copyrighted. I've read your comments about this page and I've noticed that you show your leanings to be on the side of abortion. Perhaps you should allow someone who holds no bias to look at my additions. At the same time, don't you believe in showing both sides of the violence? You have a section for violence against the abortion doctors but none for the pro-lifers. Why don't you want to have that side shown?

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 15:46, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

August 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Talk:Wilno, Ontario. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Thank you. Deconstructhis (talk) 15:07, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

July 2012
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Blackburn Hamlet has been reverted. Your edit here to Blackburn Hamlet was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://www.flickr.com/photos/66539359@N03/tags/blackburnhamlet/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. an image file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy and therefore probably should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file. 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) 18:50, 12 July 2012 (UTC) If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

October 2012
Hello, I'm Dawnseeker2000. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Eye because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Dawnseeker2000  20:52, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

April 2013
Hello, I'm Raghusri. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Baadshah (2013 film), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Hook india is not a notable or prof. or reliable source. Raghusri 14:04, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

April 2014
Hello, I'm AWhiteC. Your recent edit to the page Samuel Finer appears to have removed information, so I have reverted it to its former state for now. If you believe the change was correct, please discuss it on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. AWhiteC (talk) 21:24, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

September 2016
Hello, I'm SummerPhDv2.0. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to The Wolf of Wall Street (2013 film) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Sum mer PhD v2.0 14:04, 20 September 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.

February 2017
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 Professional certification— 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.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:43, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Professional certification. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 20:43, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

September 2019
Hello, I'm Girth Summit. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Chaudière Falls have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. Girth Summit  (blether) 16:54, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

June 2022
Hello, I'm Nick Levine. I noticed that you recently removed content from Greater Morocco without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. 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. Nick Levine (talk) 16:45, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

December 2022
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Smithers, British Columbia, you may be blocked from editing.  PK T (alk)  12:13, 22 December 2022 (UTC)