User talk:24.18.59.229

Thanks for contributing, but there is already an article on Janeane Garofalo. You had her name misspelled. --Feitclub 05:26, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)

Please see Links for the proper way to create links to other articles within Wikipedia. Gamaliel 01:57, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Please read the instructions on how to create proper links. Please do not continue to insert links incorrectly as other people will have to clean up the messes you make. Gamaliel 00:26, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This is your last warning. Please read and conform to Wikipedia policies regarding links. Given that you have been repeatedly leaving messes for others to clean up, I am going to block you for vandalism unless you stop. Gamaliel 06:43, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! Jtrost (T | C | #) 14:18, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I do not recall replacing a page with blank content. If I did this is was an error, but I definitely don't recall doing it.

Removing referenced material from Wikipedia articles
It is not appropriate to remove material which is well referenced from Wikipedia articles such at this material you removed without comment from the article on Ward Churchill Fred Bauder 15:03, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

It is not unusual that Americans who have some Native American blood, but whose families live within the mainstream community, know their heritage from family tradition, but encounter difficulty proving it to the satisfaction of administrators of affirmative action programs.

If you find some problem with material such as this which is referenced please bring it up on the talk page of the article and mention the reason you removed it in your edit summary. Fred Bauder 15:03, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about not following the correct protocol. Here's the problem with that particular link--it is not on point to Ward Churchill. It is a general comment that people who have Native American blood sometimes have difficulty proving it. A valid point, but unless there is some connection directly to Ward Churchill on why he has that difficulty in proving his Native American heritage, then it is an editorial response to the controversy by Wikipedia. I have not heard Ward Churchill raise the issues in the affirmative action link. There is a difference between linking to a legitimate editorial either pro or con on Ward Churchill (which is perfectly valid and welcomed) vs. plugging in commentary indirectly as that link did.

Small edits
Please try to group edits together a bit better. It's harder to follow pages when there have been so many edits. Also please consider registering an account. Thanks. Daniel Quinlan 04:00, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)

Why not make an account?
Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free and non-intrusive, requires you to provide no personal information, and gives you many benefits, including:
 * The use of a username of your choice
 * The ability to view all your contributions via a "My contributions" link
 * Your own user page
 * Your own talk page which, if you choose, also allows users to send you messages without knowing your e-mail address
 * The use of your own personal watchlist to which you can add articles that interest you
 * The ability to rename pages
 * The ability to upload images
 * The ability to customize the appearance and behavior of the website
 * The eligibility to become an administrator
 * The right to be heard in formal votes and elections, and on pages like votes for deletion

Click here to create an account.

– ClockworkSoul 17:30, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Evan Montvel Cohen
Please don't delete the cleanup header until you've actually cleaned up the article. RickK 06:41, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)

Block
I've unblocked you. I've no idea if the material you keep adding should be in the page or not, but the reason given was "vandalism" and your edits don't look like vandalism to me. Be aware however that edit warring is considered a bad thing, and we have a three revert rule which prohibits you from adding the same material to an article more than three times a day. I'll have a word with the admin who blocked you to see if I can sort things out. Theresa Knott (ask the rotten) 23:50, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for unblocking me and the clarifications on the rules. I was definitely not engaged in vandalism. I had an entry that was cited and would have considered any editing or criticism seriously, but it seemed strange how the entry would keep getting deleted without comment. I complained on the talk page and it happened again. Then Neutrality blocked me. I recognize the Schiavo case is a sensitive subject, but I didn't think my entry that controversial, given it was cited. 24.18.59.229 02:30, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Powerline Blog
I will continue to remove the reference to Powerline blog from the Terri Schiavo article because the action/opinion of a blog has no bearing on the encyclopediac reporting of this news story. It is enough to say that the memo is suspicious - it matters not that Powerline says it is suspicious --AStanhope 15:20, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I disagree. If there are stated suspicions, there should be a cite. You cite ABC News as the source of the memo. If there is a challenge that should be cited too. I do not care if Powerline is mentioned directly. I would do it, but if you think it is too much information fair enough. But the Powerline link should be left there so a viewer can go look at it.24.18.59.229 18:16, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

9/11 victim
Sorry, but this is not a memorial. Please do not repost material deleted within policy guidelines. Thanks. - Lucky 6.9 23:32, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

You've been temporarily blocked from further editing. - Lucky 6.9 23:45, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

There is no reason for this. 24.18.59.229 has done nothing wrong or violated any Wikipedia policy. I did not repost anything after it was deleted and I think Lucky 6.9 doing is not warranted. Note that Lucky 6.9 posted a warning at 23.32 (which was actually the first posting) then imposed a block at 23:45. Lucky 6.9 is not following wikipedia policy and is violating the position of administrator.

No, I'm not. You were politely asked not to use this site's resources in the manner you were using them and you chose to continue to do so. You pointed out yourself that there are thirteen minutes between my deletion and placing the block. The key word here is block. This is not an outright ban. You may continue to edit when the block has expired if you follow guidelines like we all do. Your statement shows that you are familiar with policy, so please follow it. Thanks. - Lucky 6.9 04:48, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Hey Lucky 6.9, the block was reversed by other administrators. I did not see your message and you blocked me a few minutes later. I did not use the site's "resources" in any improper manner. And actually listing several passengers on Flight 93 who actually fought back (and did something historic) is not the same as creating a "memorial." You went ahead and blocked me even though I did not violate the "three reversal rule." You need to lighten up.

Lost (TV series) "Black Rock" speculation
Please stop inserting the following into Lost (TV series): "The Black Rock, the slave ship that is found in the jungle is also the name of an early 20th century poem by Southern agrarian John Gould Fletcher which deals with a shipwreck and back-to-nature themes." While this may be a factual statement, it is speculative to assert that the poem is in any way connected to Lost without any source for such an assertion. "Black Rock" is many things, including the site for the Burning Man festival in Black Rock Desert, Nevada; a fictional town in the 1955 Spencer Tracy film, "Bad Day at Black Rock"; a dangerous islet off the coast of Argentina; a mystical rock in the Cook Islands ; a historic location and ferry on the Great Lakes. Since we don't know which source( or even if there is a source) that the Lost ship name is derived from, we should not include any such claims. —LeFlyman 19:18, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Take Back The Memorial
Take Back The Memorial, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Take Back The Memorial satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Take Back The Memorial and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Take Back The Memorial during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Jmlk 1  7  06:46, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Belmont Club
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Belmont Club. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Belmont Club. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:08, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Tom Bernstein


A tag has been placed on Tom Bernstein requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.chelseapiers.com/company/people/bio-tom.cfm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Postcard Cathy (talk) 01:37, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Belmont Club for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Belmont Club is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Belmont Club& until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. David Gerard (talk) 22:02, 18 October 2021 (UTC)