User talk:Bixlives!


 * }

August 2010
Wikipedia articles are only about the subject of the article and are not to be used to critique the quality of the article. That belongs in the article's talk page. Therefore, your comment was moved there. Steelbeard1 (talk) 17:58, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Lou Witney
Please note that  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  15:14, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
 * article pages are for articles, not discussion of the merits of an article, which should be taken up with the deleting admin
 * the article was tagged as liable for deletion if no references or indication of why he was notable were added within seven days. Nothing was forthcoming. It is for the article's creator to do the research necessary if they want it to stay
 * The content of deleted articles is restricted because it may be illegal (copyright infringement or libel), offensive or promotional. It also prevents articles with problems, like this, beingjust recreated in their original flawed form.

July 2012
This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on other people again, as you did at User talk:Jimfbleak, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Favonian (talk) 16:10, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

October 2012
If you have a suggestion on how to improve an article, go to the talk page and wait for someone to reply to your message, or you can edit the article yourself, an cite reliable sources for what you are saying. The article namespace should contain content on the subject, not discussion about it. Regards, — Moe   ε  11:37, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Vacuum tube
You began appropriately on the talk page of vacuum tube by protesting 70 watts output mentioned in the article. Then you blanked that out and inserted commentary into the article itself. The notice from Moe (above) was given after he reverted your edit to the article.

In other comments you indicated that Wikipedia seems unusual and inconsistent about style, so I have added a navbox of Wikipedia policies, guidelines, and help for getting acquainted with Wikipedia's workings. (Please take a few hours to read it.) Much of our manual of style does indeed borrow from S&W, but we
 * a) Have a style unique from S&W (largely due to it being nearly 100 years old), and we
 * b) Don't always follow the style manual because there are millions of editors who don't know our style, and
 * c) We are all volunteers. Not professional paid editors like at Britannica.  Also, we
 * d) Do not weigh your technical subject qualifications very much. Instead, we rely on editors citing relevant reliable sources to maintain our policy of verifiability.

Also, there is no "Wiki board" or other officious entity singularly deciding much of anything. Almost everything on Wikipedia is decided by the editing community. Please refer to Wikipedia, especially the third paragraph of the lede. You can greatly affect the content of vacuum tube by leaving your comment on the talk page (as you did initially). That will attract discussion by interested editors. Gain a consensus, get someone to alter the article in the agreed way, and the new content will be vigorously defended. —EncMstr (talk) 17:25, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

March 2013
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one of your recent edits has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.


 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Glossary of jive talk was changed by Bixlives! (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.898734 on 2013-03-28T01:37:12+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 01:37, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Glossary of jive talk. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Toddst1 (talk) 01:38, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Reply
Thanks for message, I particularly liked I read music, but not enough to hurt me. (:

I'm sure that someone will write an appropriate article one day, but I think the point I was making was that you are too close to the subject to be properly objective, good luck  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  07:07, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

November 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=582554539 your edit] to Rickie Lee Jones (album) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:13, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * more seriously, and by 1977 had met singer-songwriters Chuck E. Weiss and Tom Waits Jones consequently became romantically involved with Waits.

Template:Unsubstantiated and not made relevant
I have deleted this template because it is redundant to the templates and  which are linked from the corresponding policies and guidelines.

If you have any questions, ask on my talk page. —EncMstr (talk) 21:04, 20 November 2013 (UTC)