User talk:Ajaxfiore/Archive 1

Edit Request
Hi, could you please review the sections in La Luz Del Mundo article that are tagged for close paraphrasing and remove them if you do not find any issues involving paraphrasing? I would do this myself, however I think it would be best if another editor were to do this. Thanks for your contributions. Fordx12 (talk) 19:13, 6 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately I have been very busy lately, but I'll see what I can do. Ajaxfiore (talk) 19:19, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring warning
It would be best to stop any future reversions or edit modifications in La Luz del Mundo for the time being as this may constitute as edit warring WP:EDITWAR. It may be best to seek dispute resolution at this point. The third editor of said article will receive this same message Fordx12 (talk) 01:03, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

I have added a section in the talk page here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:La_Luz_del_Mundo#Edit_Issues so we can all discuss this issue Fordx12 (talk) 01:07, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, it seems that RidjalA has gone ahead and ignored any calls for a compromise. Refraining from editing the LDM page is, at this point, pointless. You should, if you wish, continue editing the page. Just make sure that you do not break the 3 revert role found here WP:3RR If RidjalA continues to edit war, this is the proper location to report those actions WP:AN3. Thank you for your cooperation in attempting to reach a consensus. Fordx12 (talk) 14:19, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Request for Comment on user conduct
I am creating a reference for comment on user conduct of RidjalA. This is a tool used to invite outside input and meant to help hammer out differences and set things straight, not to punish a user. So with that in mind, I ask you to contribute to this page since two users are needed and we both have encountered the same problem with him. I wish to continue working with RidjalA, but right now it is difficult to do so until he or she is able to see their actions clearly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/RidjalA Fordx12 (talk) 18:07, 3 November 2012 (UTC) You need to provide text explaining your links in the "Evidence for disputed behvior" section. Fordx12 (talk) 19:54, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, now you need to edit the "Attempts by certifier 2" section like I did here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/RidjalA#Attempts_by_certifier_Fordx12 where you should show how you personally attempted to resolve this issue. Fordx12 (talk) 00:01, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

I will be moving it into the "candadite" list (which I should have earlier). Tomorrow night I will work on editing it and finish incorporating the remaining points. I will inform RidjalA once it is finalized and moved to the certified list. Thank you for your assistance. Fordx12 (talk) 05:04, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

RFC discussion of User:RidjalA
A request for comments has been filed concerning the conduct of. You are invited to comment on the discussion at    :Requests for comment/RidjalA. -- Fordx12 (talk) 16:15, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fordx12#Edit_request

Concerns regarding edit reversions
This is concerning the reverts discussed here. If you feel an editor is introducing poorly sourced information respectively, getting admin assistance or reporting it to another user who may be able to help is the best thing to do to avoid edit warring. Be aware that there are exemptions to the rule, but consistent back and forth can still be problematic as it may leave the other editor feeling threatened or uncomfortable. Read this wiki policy here [WP:EW]. It provides suggestions and examples that will be helpful in the future to avoid this problematic pattern. Fordx12 (talk) 00:23, 11 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I believe that it would be best to give RidjalA an apology on his/her talkpage and to respond to the Third Opinion editor here . I understand where you are coming from and you meant no harm. However, I doubt that RidjalA understands this. Fordx12 (talk) 00:45, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

November 2012
Hello, I'm Jim1138. I noticed that you recently removed some content from El Norte (Monterrey) without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, Jim1138 (talk) 06:00, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

November 14, 2012
Hi Ajaxfiore, I've reverted your recent removal of material twice on La Luz del Mundo. This is my second notice (the fist one here) At the suggestion of one admin, I'm providing you with the proper channels for discussion on proposed revisions to contentious material so as to avoid another edit war.

Discussion on proposed changes to possibly contentious material related to the controversy section can be found here and the one specific to your last revision here. Thanks. RidjalA (talk) 18:49, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we request your participation in the discussion to help find a resolution. The thread is "Dispute resolution noticeboard". Thank you! --Noleander (talk) 01:02, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

NEET UG Negative Marking
There is indeed negative marking in NEET as written on the official site: http://cbseneet.nic.in/cbseneet/faq.html (See number 36) also TOI reported on 4th dec 2012: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-12-04/nagpur/35593562_1_neet-national-eligibility-negative-marks Your source is of 2011, and NEET has changed considerably since then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flipsin (talk • contribs) 15:27, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
 * My bad, I'm sorry about that. Ajaxfiore (talk) 15:43, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

DRN case input needed
Hi. I noticed you were making several edits to the La Luz del Mundo article today. Would you mind waiting on that for a few days, and helping out with the discussion at the DRN case at WP:DRN? It is probably best if we all have a discussion on the DRN page, and come to consensus first, then resume editing the article afterwards. Does that sound okay? --Noleander (talk) 23:04, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
 * ✓Done. Ajaxfiore (talk) 12:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Madonna (entertainer)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Madonna (entertainer). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:15, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
 * ✓Done. Ajaxfiore (talk) 12:53, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Your request for rollback
Hi Ajaxfiore. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Mifter (talk) 00:29, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.
 * Thanks, I will keep that in mind. Ajaxfiore (talk) 12:55, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Conversion therapy
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Conversion therapy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:15, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * ✓Done. Ajaxfiore (talk) 12:53, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Mecca
hi i didnt know how to send my message across to you and hence writing here...this is pertaining to my post on Mecca...i wanted to add some details which people may not have known previously...could you give me a reason on why my comments were removed. Cosmic.tripper (talk • contribs)
 * Hi there. This is the correct way to contact other editors on Wikipedia (see WP:UP). Your contribution to Mecca did not cite any sources. It is important that any new addition to an article (especially one such as Mecca) be supported by reliable sources (see WP:VERIFY, WP:RELIABLE, and WP:CITE). Edits must also follow Wikipedia's Manual of Style (see WP:STYLE), i.e. there is no need to capitalize words such as "NOT". If what you have written merits inclusion in the article, I suggest you mention it in talk page (Talk:Mecca), perhaps editors there might be willing to help you. Ajaxfiore (talk) 21:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Discussion in La Luz del Mundo
Hi, I wanted to share the Bold, Revert, Discuss WP:CYCLE so that we may adhere to it when we disagree on our edits. So far, I've noticed that you've only been Bold and have Reverted, but not started a discussion following your repeated reversions here. Furthermore, I feel that we may have too much of a vetted interest in the La Luz del Mundo page, and to avoid WP:COI and WP:SPA concerns, would ask that if you feel your contribution may be controversial (i.e. that it may be reverted) that it be discussed in advance on the article talk page for the rest of the community to discuss. Note that I will be doing the same. Thank you for your time. RidjalA (talk) 07:09, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I am fully aware of the BRD cycle WP:CYCLE, and I'm certain I have abided by Wikipedia's policies. I have also used the talk page whenever it was necessary, and discussed "controversial" edits. I've noticed you continue to violate Wikipedia's WP:NPA policy, and you continue to try to intimidate users by threatening to ban/block them. As for the WP:COI and WP:SPA concerns, I think our contributions speak for themselves:
 * RidjalA (Special:Contributions/RidjalA, Especial:Contribuciones/RidjalA)
 * Ajaxfiore (Special:Contributions/Ajaxfiore, Especial:Contribuciones/Ajaxfiore)
 * Ajaxfiore (talk) 13:05, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Editor with the single most contributions to La Luz Del Mundo? Yes, our contributions certainly speak for themselves: you lead the pack with 189 revisions. How am I intimidating anyone by pointing out facts like these, and that by your edit patterns I believe you're overly sympathetic to LLDM, perhaps even a member of the church? I'm just clarifying that you appear to have a vetted interest in LLDM and ask that we refrain from making further contentious edits without opening up to discussion in advance. To be fair, I will be doing the same. Have a wonderful day, RidjalA (talk) 10:46, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * For the n-th time, please stop making unbased accusations against me, otherwise I will have to report you for violating Wikipedia policies. First you claim that most of my edits are minor fixes by saying "including typo fixes, comprise the majority of ajaxfiore's contributions" and now you seem to be attributing the whole article to me. And now you want me to consult with you before making a "contentious" edit (i.e. one that you might disagree with). As Noleander (talk) said, let's assume I am a church member and have a "vetted interest" in the article, there is no policy preventing me from editing the article. Now can we be a bit mature, and try to improve the article? Ajaxfiore (talk) 16:43, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people/RfC
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people/RfC. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 16:16, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Koch brothers
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Koch brothers. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 16:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

marple hall
Hi, why have undone the edits and references I made to the marple hall page? You think hasslehoff really owned it or the inappropriate behaviour mentioned should remain hidden? FP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.231.171 (talk) 04:30, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Your edits were identified as vandalism/libel and lacked appropriate sources. Ajaxfiore (talk) 00:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I removed a comment that had described the Headteacher as "a bit of a knob".(Was the "knob" comment I removed, not libelous ?)..hardly vandalism. The same goes for removing the comment regarding David Hasslehoff as the previous owner of a stately home that was a ruin before he was even born...again, hardly vandalism or libelous. I mentioned a former teacher having been found guilty of abusing children and sentenced to prison time...(I`m aware I hadn`t referenced the court date)..not vandalism in my view and not libelous either. I mentioned another teacher, guilty of indecent exposure in front of a pupil (hard to reference when I didn`t report the incident for more than 20 years) and made mention of him since having died. Where is the vandalism in any of that? As one of the two teachers is now dead, I assume your libel comment is soley in respect of the convicted paedophile?

I shall edit the Marple Hall site again and ask that you leave it alone this time, as there`re no grounds for protecting these monsters that prey on children. LodFP (talk) 10:25, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You are more than welcome to contribute valuable information as long as you adhere to Wiki policies, specifically WP:BLP. Ajaxfiore (talk) 20:25, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing me in the right direction ie WP:BLP and also for editing my (talk) page. Message received and understood. LodFP —Preceding undated comment added 20:46, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Abe Vigoda
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Abe Vigoda. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 17:15, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

January 2013
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule&#32;at La Luz del Mundo. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. &mdash;Darkwind (talk) 02:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment: For reference, emailed me (very politely) to request that I reconsider his block because he felt he was reverting vandalism.  I replied that NOT3RR #4 doesn't apply because the other editor's changes were not "obvious vandalism". &mdash;Darkwind (talk) 05:39, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Clarification: I am not trying to claim ownership of the article. I meant to say that because I am a contributor to the article, it seemed like I was edit-warring, not reverting vandalism. Ajaxfiore (talk) 12:21, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you both for your comments, I will keep these in mind when editing. Ajaxfiore (talk) 23:02, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

While you're waiting...
I'd like to welcome you to start a conversation at the Luz Del Mundo talk page. I'll be more than happy to discuss any of our nearly-polarized differing philosophies on how to best improve that article. CheersRidjalA (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:22, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "La Luz del Mundo". {| style="border: 0; width: 100%;"
 * style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |
 * style="width: 50%; vertical-align: top;" |

If you wish to open a DR/N filing, click the "Request dispute resolution" button below this guide or go to Dispute resolution noticeboard/request for an easy to follow, step by step request form.

What this noticeboard is:


 * It is an early step to resolve content disputes after talk page discussions have stalled. If it's something we can't help you with, or is too complex to resolve here, our volunteers will point you in the right direction.

What this noticeboard is not:


 * It is not a place to deal with the behavior of other editors. We deal with disputes about article content, not disputes about user conduct.
 * It is not a place to discuss disputes that are already under discussion at other dispute resolution forums.
 * It is not a substitute for the talk pages: the dispute must have been discussed extensively on a talk page (not just through edit summaries) before resorting to DRN.
 * It is not a court with judges or arbitrators that issue binding decisions: we focus on resolving disputes through consensus, compromise, and explanation of policy.

Things to remember:


 * Discussions should be civil, calm, concise, neutral, and objective. Comment only about the article's content, not the other editors.   Participants who go off-topic or become uncivil may be asked to leave the discussion.
 * Let the other editors know about the discussion by posting {{subst:drn-notice}} on their user talk page.
 * Sign and date your posts with four tildes " ".
 * If you ever need any help, ask one of our volunteers, who will help you as best as they can. You may also wish to read through the FAQ page located here and on the DR/N talkpage.

Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you! EarwigBot   operator  /  talk 16:03, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

The Black Belles
the reason nothing was their is because the information was incorrect I just thought I'd let you know cuz I was in the middle of editing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Violetcries (talk • contribs) 16:45, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

hi sorry if any relaible citations may have gone missing in all the editing and undoing. All my edits had reliable citatiosn as far as I kmnow, let me know any that haven't. Meanwhile will undo your undo  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.30.146.240 (talk) 02:18, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jalisco, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page El Informador (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Did you post at WP:RSN today?
I noticed an inquiry about a source on the La Luz del Mundo article posted at WP:RSN, from an ip editor. It was unsigned. This might not have been you, but if it was you may want to explain publicly what happened, whether here or there. -- UseTheCommandLine (talk) 06:17, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know, I have signed the comments now. I was in a hurry and forgot to add my signature, although I thought I was logged in. The fact that you were immediately able to tell it was me is evidence enough to suggest that I have nothing to hide. Next time, it would be best to notify the editor who inadvertently revealed his IP address via email so that he can contact Oversight. Ajaxfiore (talk) 16:15, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I noted it here because I thought that if it had been you, it was a perfectly reasonable oversight. It may not have been you. In either case, I thought it would be much less useful to other editors and the community if it were a conversation that were held privately than if it were held publicly. If, as a dispute resolution volunteer, I were seen to be having private contact with someone involved in a dispute i am attempting to help mediate, that could be seen as problematic if the dispute were to escalate and be seen by other editors, even if the content of the discussion was completely innocuous. I hope that helps to clarify my concerns and reasoning. -- UseTheCommandLine (talk) 20:29, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I completely understand and would have done something similar in your situation. It seems like the DRN case will most likely close due to lack of participation. Anyway, thank you for all your help. Happy editing. Ajaxfiore (talk) 22:23, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, from a DR/N volunteer
This is a friendly reminder to involved parties that there is a current Dispute Resolution Noticeboard case still awaiting comments and replies. If the dispute is still ongoing, please add your input. UseTheCommandLine (talk) 20:20, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Hitler is kaput!
Hitler is kaput is not a 2008 russian film? --84.102.70.81 (talk) 23:02, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

The Teahouse Turns One!
It's been an exciting year for the Teahouse and you were a part of it. Thanks so much for visiting, asking questions, sharing answers, being friendly and helpful, and just keeping Teahouse an awesome place. You can read more about the impact we're having and the reflections of other guests and hosts like you. Please come by the Teahouse to celebrate with us, and enjoy this sparkly cupcake badge as our way of saying thank you. And, Happy Birthday!


 * --Ocaasi and the rest of the Teahouse Team 22:35, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

LLDM logo
The one you uploaded looks good; there's JPEG artifacting in it, but that shouldn't be an issue at the low resolutions the logo will be used at. However for better attribution, can you also add a link to the  parameter indicating the source file from which you cropped it? TheFeds 06:03, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I have added the link for the source file. Thanks for your help. This is how it looks on the article: La Luz del Mundo. I left it at the default 200px. Ajaxfiore (talk) 16:25, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Prof.Dr Nasir Ansar
Hi for Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Prof.Dr Nasir Ansar you tagged with db-A7

A7 and anything starting with A's only applies to articles. We do not delete AFC attempts for no claim of importance, instead just decline and let the writer improve it. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:33, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I will keep that in mind. I apologize for the inconvenience that caused.  Ajax F¡ore talk 00:43, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
APerson (talk!) 20:29, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC Casitas del Sur case was accepted
 Casitas del Sur case, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as C-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! APerson (talk!) 20:55, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jorge Erdely Graham (September 8)
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [ Articles for creation help desk], or on the [ . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! APerson (talk!) 20:55, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer
Sorry for the previous misunderstanding.

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:
 * Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:05, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC Jorge Erdely Graham was accepted
 Jorge Erdely Graham, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-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! APerson (talk!) 23:59, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

DYK for Casitas del Sur case
The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Janus U & Newport U
Hello Ajax. You set up this redirect for Janus_University to go to Newport University (California). But really the NU article has no verification that shows Janus as the successor. I recommend that you set up a new article for Janus University. You can compose the article and then just revise the redirect. (I think.) – S. Rich (talk) 23:47, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know, I did not realize the Newport website is now offline. I will add a source shortly.  Ajax F¡ore talk 23:53, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
 * . – S. Rich (talk) 23:58, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

October 2013
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring and WP:BLP issues at Casitas del Sur case and Jorge Erdely Graham. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 01:14, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Response: when your block expires, you are welcome to file a report in the appropriate forum. And you can be blocked for edit warring without breaching WP:3RR.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:16, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * @Ajaxfiore, if you want to ask questions about your block or ask to be unblocked, you need to do that here on this page.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:32, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * No need to. Block has expired.  Ajax F¡ore talk 03:19, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sanjuana Martínez


The article Sanjuana Martínez has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:42, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Good Article barnstar

 * Thanks, the article significantly improved because of your corrections and suggestions. Ajaxfiore (talk) 14:26, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Warning
Text on Talk:Jorge Erdely Graham was redacted by a Wikimedia Foundation email response volunteer. You reinstated it. The text was, as stated, in violation of WP:BLP. This applies everywhere, including talk pages. If you do this again, you will be blocked. Please don't. You are free to rephrase your comments in terms that are compliant with policy. Guy (Help!) 21:55, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Ferry Mayne
I have a msg from you regarding a submission about Ferdy Mayne. Not onl do I not know who this person is, I have also never made any comment on any subject on Wikipaedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.210.1.85 (talk) 23:38, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Editor Review
Hello, I have responded to your request for editor review. You can view my feedback at Editor review/Ajaxfiore. (Megatron Omega (talk) 02:16, 11 March 2014 (UTC))

EditorReviewArchiver: Automatic processing of your editor review
This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 18 March 2014 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7 days. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding  to the review page will prevent further automated actions. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:18, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

can you tell me what you undid thank you

Talkback
De728631 (talk) 22:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC)