User talk:B'er Rabbit

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Mangwanani (talk) 17:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style


 * What's offensive to me is that you are proposing to lump two groups together that have no more in common than Episcopalians and Mormons, and everything I am trying to say seems to fall on deaf ears like "Well we've decided we're just gonna do it anyhow, no matter what reasons there are". Would it be appropriate to lump in Episcopalians and Mormons projects if both groups were inactive, just because they are both from the same part of the world?  No, I don't think so.  What the two groups believe makes them very different. It makes no more sense to take two random groups that have the same word in the name and practically nothing else in common, very different beliefs,  and it seems patronizing. Also most of the relationship between the two groups historically can be described as antagonistic.   If there were no objections, I would say go right ahead.   B&#39;er Rabbit (talk) 20:46, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * As I have said, you are clearly determined to have your own way regardless of any objections raised, so why do you even go through the charade of pretending to ask for input? B&#39;er Rabbit (talk) 23:27, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

File:Vaclose.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Vaclose.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:07, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Sheba
Hi. Why so aggressive? You were so upset that you reverted a whole set of edits which had nothing to do with the issue you took offense to. Regarding the "global importance": with all due respect to political correctness, but clearly, not many WP users would know about the Queen of Sheba and her kingdom, were it not for the biblical story. Also chronologically, the Bible preceded the Qur'an by many centuries, and the Ethiopian tradition is even mor recent. Unless you can bring some sourced arguments to the contrary, please leave it as it is; and anyhow, please pay a bit more attention before reverting multiple edits with which you yourself probably do agree, just because of one single one that rubs you the wrong way. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 14:11, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

September 2016
Your recent editing history at Sheba shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Ogress 20:12, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. Ogress 21:23, 4 September 2016 (UTC)