User talk:Epistades

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 name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Wikipedia welcomes everyone to contribute to the best of their ability. Please understand that the user who made that contribution did it in good faith. Calling him an idiot is not the correct way to handle the situation.
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Krm500 00:04, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Ryan Smyth article
"too redundant - the idiot who made these changes knows NOTHING about grammar - he/she should be BANNED!"

Learn some respect. Or go clean your room. Either is appropriate for an 11 year old trying to glorify Smyth's 4 days as an Islander over 12 seasons as an Oiler. The strokes 23:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I love you. Epistades 25:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I love you.
 * 1) [[Image:Information.svg|25px]] Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent contribution removed content from . Please be more careful when editing articles and do not remove content from Wikipedia without a good reason, which should be specified in the edit summary. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox.   The strokes 23:55, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) [[Image:Information.svg|25px]] Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia. Your edits could be considered vandalism, and have been reverted.  If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Removing his date of birth with his status as an Islander, and removing at least one other reference to the Edmonton Oilers suggests a motive of writing a biased article
 * 3) [[Image:Stop_hand.svg|25px]] This is your last warning. The next time you delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, you will be blocked.

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism, spam, deliberate misinformation, personal attacks, and other forms of disruption will not be tolerated.Kafziel Talk 21:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Peter Forsberg
If Forsberge were a 'Restricted Free Agent' I'd agree with you. But, he's an 'Unrestricted Free Agent' (mean he's no on any NHL team). The Predators official website doesn't list him on their roster. GoodDay 21:36, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Would you please show me on the Predators official website, where Forsberg is? Forsberg is a UFA. GoodDay 21:52, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Well since you really don't like listening to reason.... tell me then, if Forsberg doesn't take an offer from any other team does that mean that he can hold-out on the Predators when the season starts? No it does not, it also doesn't mean that they can trade him because he is not the Predators to trade, whereas an unsigned restricted free agent can do or have both those things done to them. So stop pissing people off here trying to enforce your viewpoint that has gotten no support from anybody else or has any basis in fact, and stop resorting to your childish personal attacks. If that's your attitude, then it'd be better if you go off and start your own encyclopedia where you can publish your own views and ideas. But take my word for it, no one will want to read it because no one wants to read an encyclopedia for some guy's opinion. CroCan    "Short answer 'yes' with an 'if'...long answer 'no' with a 'but'"   22:20, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

3RR warning
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Note: Reverts that you make anonymously are counted as well; because you have already reverted numerous times as 69.17.97.216, if you revert that article one more time you will be blocked immediately. Kafziel Talk 22:21, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

You have been blocked for a period of 48 hours for edit warring on the Peter Forsberg article. You may resume editing after the block expires, but continued edit warring will result in longer blocks without further notice. Kafziel Talk 02:33, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

November 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Chris P. Chicken has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Spitfire19 T/C 06:39, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus, as you did to Daniel C. Mitchell. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains under way. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Thank you. —  Spike Toronto  07:21, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
I replied to your request for feedback. I hope the comments/suggestions are useful. If you have a question, comment or query, please send me a message. Thanks! Chevy monte  carlo  07:10, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Daniel C. Mitchell for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Daniel C. Mitchell 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/Daniel C. Mitchell 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. Wgolf (talk) 22:55, 2 June 2019 (UTC)