User talk:Fusion is the future

This is my user talk page.

Atilla Engin Article
Hello Pablo,

Nice meeting you. You put several tags on the article I was working on for some time now.
 * I will need your kind help to understand where exactly in the article do I start advertising?
 * Another thing is about its tone or style.

What tone or style is appropriate for Wikipedia?

Since the integrity of the article is in accordance with the integrity of the artist and his (photo supported) accomplishments, in terms of his work he's done for his students as he dedicated his life to them, so that they could reach their dreams, and also in terms of his cross-cultural projects which helped create awareness about the differences people have and about them learning to live together in harmony.

World is changing, so is The Wikipedia.

I wouldn't use the same tone or style if I was writing an article about the city of Bristol in England or about a famed attorney.

We do not want a boring Wikipedia. Although Wikipedia is the best encyclopedia with the utmost level of quality and accurate information and thanks to all of us, still, we want an interesting-exciting Wikipedia too, so that, it is fun reading/seeing, going through, while learning.

I vehemently reject the idea of advertising dear Pablo. It is not only an insult to the artist himself but an insult to me too, as a Wikipedia contributor.

Please take a look at the article again and try to make connection with what I just said.

Try for instance, to see the importance of the big success of an ordinary, evening-class music students reaching the famed Jazzhus Montmartre. It's a dream Pablo. They did it. And then their picture and the list of roosters next to it who all happen to be famous Jazz recording (Wikipedia) artists. Who wouldn't be proud of them? Who wouldn't attribute their smiling picture to the true fairytale which were written by them?

Still, I do respect your point of view and I will go ahead and see if I could do something about it and then I will get back to you. In the meantime, please do lift the tags dear Pablo, I'll appreciate it. Sincerely best. Fusion is the future (talk) 02:05, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Atilla Engin
I have requested a third opinion on this article; there seems to be no interest from the Jazz project. I note that you are going to request an administrator look at it too, and that's fine with me, please hurry up and do so. It desperately needs more editors to review it. However I shall continue to edit whatever, whenever and wherever I choose; you do not have the right to "strongly suggest" what I may, or may not, edit. pablo 22:42, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

September 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Atilla Engin, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Gyrofrog (talk) 23:33, 22 September 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  - alt 05:34, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia!
Welcome!

Hello, Fusion is the future, 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 my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Chevy monte  carlo  - alt 05:34, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

KODA (Denmark)
Hi - I have now created a few links from other pages, so I have now removed the "orphan" tag.

I think there is a delay before new pages pop up in the Wikipedia Search box, but not being an administrator there is not much I can do. I guess you have to be patient. Cheers. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 15:26, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. I do appreciate that.Fusion is the future (talk) 15:30, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Chevy monte  carlo  14:45, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Ben Webster Foundation
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Ben Webster Foundation, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://benwebster.dk/serviceydelser.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 16:14, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I am letting you know that the permission is verified by OTRS team. Thank you.Fusion is the future (talk) 00:57, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Ole Brask
Generally speaking, it's better to have a more specific category where possible. Like "Danish photographers" - then you don't need "photographers" as well. If you play around with HotCat a little, you can find out what's available.

Excelllent work; happy editing! -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:55, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I greatly appreciate your encouraging opinion. Fusion is the future (talk) 20:17, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Stéphane Belmondo
Good work. I removed a couple of K-bytes earlier in the year, but I don't know enough about Stéphane Belmondo to attempt the much needed re-write. Arjayay (talk) 15:34, 17 October 2010 (UTC) To be fair it is not purely a machine translation, someone has removed the usual "howlers" that Google usually makes. Arjayay (talk) 15:06, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you Arjayay, still long way to go though.:-) Fusion is the future (talk) 20:20, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Your edit summary about copy-paste is right, it started off as a direct translation of the French page. Click on "francais" under languages (bottom of left-hand column on the Belmondo page) to see the original.

Hello Arjayay, thanks for the tip. I checked it out. Although I do not really understand the language, French Wikipedia might have different criteria than that of the English version. It started like this in 2006 Version du 1 mars 2006 à 11:19 and two years later this Version du 17 novembre 2008 à 17:59. They could (possibly) copy and paste the whole thing. The person who came with the text disappeared right after. Same thing with the English version.Revision as of 18:47, 26 March 2010 by Ségomine (talk). It's okay though. Belmondo appears to be a great artist. I found more-valuable references and I am still working on the text. I'll be more than happy if you have some thoughts might improve the article even further. Please give me a hand when you feel so. Thanks again Fusion is the future (talk) 22:48, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Gyllene Skivan
Very good. One question: the phrase "was established in 1933", does it refer to the magazine? That might require a little clarification. Otherwise, it looks good. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 13:43, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Perfect. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 13:55, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Very good observation. I just noticed the uncertainty about it and replaced "it" with "which." I greatly appreciate your guidance. Thank you. Fusion is the future (talk) 14:00, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Using the "This is a minor edit" box
Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Bernt Rosengren, as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you and keep up the good work! Tomas e (talk) 08:53, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello Thomas, I just noticed that I forgot to acknowledge your kind notice. Thanks for letting me know. I'm still trying to cope with this Minor edit thing. I can see my edits're not being considered as minor. From now on I will not check the box even with minor wordings, inserting references and so on, and I hope this will resolve the problem I created. In the meantime, I'll go ahead and study closely the minor edit guidelines. Thanks again. Fusion is the future (talk) 20:36, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Can Balcioglu
I think you're right - this smacks of hoax. I'm going to mark it for speedy in a moment. Another clue: look at Special:Contributions/Blacklioncan. Seems to be a single-use only account. Furthermore, the only information about anyone under the name I can find online suggest that he lives in the US, and the photograph shows this fellow wearing a lapel pin with a motif taken from the Seal of the United States. Good catch!

My own advice about things like this is follow your gut: if you think it warrants speedying, then mark it. No one will hold it against you if the speedy is declined. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 13:31, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I do appreciate your guidance. Fusion is the future (talk) 19:57, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Now he changes his story again, as we speak. He says that he's not working at the Istanbul Policy Center anymore and evenly, not working as the Assistant to Mr.Joost Lagendijk. It seems, everything's to good to be true at the age of 26: Notoriety, medal of honors, he just (1. of October) founded, he says, the National Secularist Party no sign of it on the Google, that he started spreading the ideology at Facebook He founded the National Secularist Party of Turkey at facebook which promotes National-Secularism (Milliyetçi Laiklik)then quickly removed that, yet on the top of all of these, he's also working with a so called world-famous photographer to find new modeling talents and much more! What's left? Of course references or/and verifiable sources.:-) Fusion is the future (talk) 20:55, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * See? Told you your instinct was spot on. :-)  I'm a little perturbed that this has been sitting unmolested since August; even so, better late than never.  Well caught. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:00, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Minor edits
Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Qwfp (talk) 19:54, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I'm still trying to cope with this Minor edit thing. I can see my edits're not being considered as minor. From now on I will not check the box even with minor wordings, inserting references and so on, and I hope this will resolve the problem I created. In the meantime, I'll go ahead and study closely the minor edit guidelines. Thanks again.Fusion is the future (talk) 20:29, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Once again, a reminder
It is a violation of Wikipedia policy for a blocked editor to create a new account in order to edit. I have warned you about this before (see User talk:Arnold Reisman), and I do so know in regard to the edits of the new user User:Fusion is the future. At this point, I will revert your edits to the article Arnold Reisman, but will hold off on reverting your edits to other articles. If, however, you continue to edit using this new name, I will revert all those edits as well, as being the edits of a block-evading sockpuppet. There is only one way for you to continue editing here, and creating new sockpuppets every few months is not it. You must request an unblock to the User:Arnold Reisman, admitting to your past behavior, and pledging to edit according to Wikipedia policy inthe future. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:13, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello, what are you talking about? Please explain. Fusion is the future (talk) 21:20, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * What is it you don't understand? Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:23, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Why did you revert all my edits? I used all my day finding references for this particular subject. And I did. They all are legitimite, verifiable references. What are you doing? Or are you accusing me being this subject? Please stop this and revert the edits I made since this morning, before you go any further.Fusion is the future (talk) 21:29, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The editor User:Arnold Reisman was indefinitely blocked in May. The editor has since used sockpuppets/meatpuppets to edit the article Arnold Reisman.  Editing by a blocked editor using sockpuppets or meatpuppets is a violation of Wikipedia policy. Your edits to this article appear to be similar to the kind of edits the blocked editor has made in the past.  Are you in any way connected with the editors User:Arnold Reisman, User:Ellen Reisman or User:BandGwolf? Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:37, 25 October 2010 (UTC)


 * No I AM NOT THIS PERSON. Please stop that. I have never heard of him in my life until this morning!!! I was curious and I FOUND references, four of them and they all are reliable sources. Please do revert my edits back before I take this issue with the administrators. You really made a big, rush-to-judgment, mistake. Thank youFusion is the future (talk) 21:47, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Calm down, please. All you needed to do was to answer my question, there was no need to go find someone to intercede. You say you are not connected to User:Arnold Reisman, User:Ellen Reisman or User:BandGwolf, and I will take that on good faith to be the truth. That being the case, I would expect that your future edits will not be adding Dr. Reisman's self-published books to articles as references, as self-published books are not considered to be reliable sources. I will now revert myslef and restore your edits until I have the opportunity to examine the sources and verify that they are indeed reliable. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:52, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Honestly, this subject has some credibility. I read the history of his erradic edits, but then, I found some credible references. I checked them all, you can do the same. This subject lectured at Picmet for instance. Thanks again. Fusion is the future (talk) 22:02, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem was that Dr. Reisman wouldn't accept that Wikipedia policy does not allow self-published books to be considered reliable sources unless the author has some verifiable expertise on the subject, and Reisman did not have that expertise, or, at least, his expertise could not be verified. (These were books on subjects other than the subject of his professional study.) After some back and forth, Reisman was blocked indefinitely, and has attempted to edit using other accounts since then -- which is what I thought you were.  My apologies for upsetting you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:16, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

You know something, most of the sound friendships start with misunderstanding if not fighting.:-) I do appreciate your common sense and rationale you demonstrated. I would like to share this with you. Things I say and do are the basis of my credibility. I will never jeopardize it. That's why people trust me, including the banks.:-). If they don't, I am as good as a dead fish. As far as I'm concerned, Arnold Reisman cries out to be recognized for the things he accomplished. I am an orphan and/or stub saver.:-) To be honest with you, I do not remember how did I come across his article. Because he is out of my range or my interest to be exact. Anyway, I used many hours today finding these references and I was happy catching some. (I wonder why didn't he do this himself?) Just now for example, I found one another reference for one of his latest books:Turkey’s Modernization: Refugees from Nazism and Ataturk’s Vision To me, it looks credible. What do you think?
 * Nice to meet you Ken. Fusion is the future (talk) 23:31, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry to disabuse you, but New Academia Publishing is a self-publication outfit, not a reputable publisher, and the subject matter is not one in which Reisman has expertise. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:59, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Fusion: You are showing rather more interest in the Reisman article than I would expect from someone who just happened upon the subject, and whose interest is actually in jazz. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:52, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I have removed the majority of the unsourced statements from the article, but have left a few basic facts in so that the article is not gutted entirely. Facts on Wikipedia must be verifiable and supported by citations from reliable sources.  Any fact presented which is disputed by another editor and is not properly sourced is subject to removal.  This is a basic precept of Wikipedia and is not negotiable.  For any of the declaratory statements I removed to be returned to the article, they must be supported by citations from reliable sources. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:01, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps it would be best to move on for now...better safe than sorry. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:10, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * They were directed at you - this is a pretty contentious article, and in my experience it's best in such cases to step back and let things settle for a bit. Maybe spend some time working on other articles instead. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 19:23, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Ken, hello again. I need some clarification if you don't mind: I am looking forward to hear your point of view Ken. Thanks. Fusion is the future (talk) 18:00, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you telling me that I'm only allowed to edit Jazz articles?
 * What is your rationale behind, removing the Biography section I just opened? Since it's a very common thing to have a BIO.
 * I asked a general question at the article's talk page, about inserting an infobox. I guess you didn't have chance to read it. Today, I did contact the subject and asked him to send me a photo with permission which he did.Arnold Reisman's E-mail Address
 * Question: Do you think that placing an infobox and a photo of the subject will be unsuitable and against the Wikipedia guidelines?
 * This article was sitting there for four years and yet nobody came with reliable-verifiable references to improve the article. With a keen research on the Google, I found five reliable sources in a matter of no time and that's why you removed the tags yesterday. This is what everybody suppose to do at Wikipedia, improving the articles. Isn't it?
 * Now, please be kind and put the Bio section back you removed. Or, convince me why he doesn't need/is not allowed one. By the way, I fully agree with you that you removed an unsourced-contentious sentence.
 * All statements of fact on Wikipedia must be supported by citations from reliable sources if challenged. Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:41, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Let me be frank and clear. Because you made a direct and positive statement that you are not in anyway connected with User:Arnold Reisman, User:Ellen Reisman or User:BandGwolf, I extended you good faith, and reverted my deletion of the changes you made to the article Arnold Reisman.  I accepted your statement that you just happened across the article in some way and did some research and sourced some statements.  But extending good faith doesn't mean that I turn off my brain and stop thinking, and when I see you continue to edit this article, which is outside the normal course of your editing history, and, indeed beginning to  advocate  for the article and its subject, Dr. Reisman, then I begin to thank that I am bring duped, and my good faith dries up. Now, the article as it stands at this moment still has a significant part of its declaratory statements totally unreferenced.  I would be totally within Wikipedia policy to go to that article right now, and remove everything from it except statements that are supported by a reference from a reliable source.  With the article in that state, there would be little or nothing in its content which would cause it to pass our notability requirements, and it's likely that the article would be deleted and, given its past history, possibly even salted so that it can not be created again. Back when the self-promotion of Dr. Reisman first became an issue, I created a sockpuppet investigation report (SPI), in which I listed all the IP addresses that had been used to edit the Arnold Reisman article in the past.  Once User:Arnold Reisman and User:Ellen Reisman were indefinitely blocked from editing, I archived the SPI as it served no useful purpose.  When the article began to be edited by User:BandGwolf, I warned that sockpuppet off, and the editing stopped, so there was no need to revive that report.  But if you continue to act as if you are a sockpuppet or meatpuppet of Dr. Reisman, I will have no choice but to dust off that SPI and make it current again, so that administrators can take a look and see if your editing justifies an indefinite block or not. Now, if you are what you say you are, this is all, obviously, an incredible annoyance to you, but that's the way things are.  I do not intend to allow Dr. Reisman to break Wikipedia's rules and edit the article about himself, ever again, unless he takes the proper steps to rehabilitate his account (which I've outlined on his talk page). If you are, as you say, an innocent party, and have just gotten caught in the wrong place at the wrong time, I'm sorry for that, but the way to extricate yourself is to not continue to edit the article, and advocate for Dr. Reisman. The more you do that, the more likely that the course of events outlined above will take place.  I cannot tell you what you should do, the decision is entirely yours, but you should make that decision with a clear knowledge of the likely outcome of the one choice.  It's up to you to decide what you would like to do. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:13, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Ken, it's incredible and hard to believe that you still think I am (I might be) this subject which I am NOT, nor am I associated with any of his people. I have never heard of him in my entire life until yesterday. This is going out of hand. I sense somewhat of a disrespectful behavior atribuited to between-the-lines threat. All I did was finding reliable sources and yet you still did not address my specific questions. For example, I came across an article created by 'Ser Amantio di Nicolao' which was subject to deletion.Areias River (Goiás) I made a quick research (exactly like I did with Arnold Reisman) and found a good, much needed reference from a published book. I edited. That very article was also out of my range. The reference is still there and yet nobody threatened me.
 * Ken, are you obsessed with this guy? Will you never let anyone edit the article and improve it? I was indeed improving the article.
 * Now I'll be frank and clear with you too. I repeat again: I am not this person. Have a wonderful day and thank you. Fusion is the future (talk) 21:28, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I have not threatened you, I have said that if Wikipedia's policies are being broken, I will take the necessary steps to help see that they are enforced. So, please, do as you wish, you will be judged by your actions, per the outline above. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:50, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Firebirds Prince Lasha Sonny Simmons.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Firebirds Prince Lasha Sonny Simmons.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:44, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Linking
Hi, I have noticed that you are going through several pages and linking almost everything that has an article. Per WP:LINK, only uncommon terms need to be linked in Wikipedia articles. For example, for a Christina Aguilera music article, you already know she is a pop singer and what a pop singer is. Therefore the term does not need to be linked. Please study WP:LINK. Thanks!! Candy o32  21:11, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, I will agree with you on some I revereted. But the writer and producers name such as Polow da Don, Ester Dean are already linked at the top, as is electropop.  Candy  o32  03:05, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Pardon? Candy  o32  23:02, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Robin Birney
Hello Fusion is the future. I am just letting you know that I deleted Robin Birney, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 01:43, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

AN/I
This thread on AN/I directly concerns you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:12, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Question
Why are you "commenting out" text in biographical articles with ?undefined Nothing there looks controversial or potentially defamatory. pablo 16:24, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It's a fair question. Well, I learned from you, among other things, that you said "what he did - when he did?" I thought, the groups he mentioned were not significant enough since none of them had articles on the Wikipedia. Besides, it was mentioned right in the head section without any reference for five and a half years. That's why, I hid the text, instead of deleting it; for later use, if something changes. Am I far out? Fusion Is the  Future  16:42, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe that you are, in many ways, "far out". Contrast this with "your" article on Atilla Engin; where you mention many ensembles that this drummer has been part of. It would be nice to have some supporting references for the information on Matt Skiba, but I don't think it needs removing or hiding. pablo 20:42, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree. Hidden information only makes editing it more difficult. If information is not verified, it should not be in the article--you can keep it on the talk page, for instance. Drmies (talk) 15:47, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

December 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Leonel Bastos. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 04:03, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I have opened a discussion at Content noticeboard, to see if other editors agree with me that your edits to Atilla Engin display a basic lack of article writing skills and a lack of knowledge of relevant guidelines. Feel free to burn this after reading, and please do not return to my talk page. Drmies (talk) 04:55, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: Pouring the grief out
Thank you for the kind words. However, I am neither pristine nor flawless (as you have previously noted). I didn't see any need to add to WP:AN/I; it had run its course by the time I saw it, and what needed to be said was already said. I do not see anyone else acting in bad faith toward you - acting with frustration, perhaps, but not in bad faith. I will say (again) that I stand behind my comments at Talk:Atilla Engin. Other editors have weighed in with valid opinions (perhaps AllyD's most of all) regarding the same article, and some of these ideas should be non-controversial (like un-linking commonly known words). As a bit of constructive criticism (at least, I intend it as such), I suggest that you review Ownership of articles. Thank you. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 16:08, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Fusion is the future/A. Engin
User:Fusion is the future/A. Engin, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Fusion is the future/A. Engin and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Fusion is the future/A. Engin during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. pablo 22:09, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Carsten Dahl


Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Mhiji (talk) 16:32, 30 December 2010 (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) 14:28, 24 November 2015 (UTC)