User talk:Iloveredhair

Shouting
There is not need to put request in caps, or to overuse !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. We can all read whjat you have asked. Slatersteven (talk) 14:39, 5 November 2010 (UTC) :: Well please, could someone unlock the BNP page so that I can put in a few extra external links? I am get so annoyed with the stubborness on Wiki

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 17:10, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of "User talk:Hentai-lover1000"
A page you created, User talk:Hentai-lover1000, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is vandalism.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you.  WAYNE  OLAJUWON 22:43, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

only warning
If you carry on posting disruptively to Talk:Lesbian sexual practices, you will be blocked from editing. Gwen Gale (talk) 22:43, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Well stop deleting my comments! I made some valid questions and they were rejected!


 * Given that, along with User talk:Hentai-lover1000, I have blocked you from editing for 55 hours, owing to vandalism. This is an encyclopedia site, not a comedy blog. If, when the block has automatically lifted, you carry on with posts of that kind (you know what you've been doing), the next block will be much longer. Gwen Gale (talk) 22:48, 26 November 2010 (UTC)


 * No, it was not a joke, it was a question on whether lesbian "sex" should be classed as sex or not given that they have no penetration.
 * Is there any RS making the point (other then as a joke) its not sex? I have to say thgugh that as this edd made one comment on the talk page that I can see it seems that blocking them for one comment you did n ot like seems excesive.Slatersteven (talk) 15:05, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * They were blocked for edit warring over the comment and also posting it to a fake talk page (see above). Gwen Gale (talk) 16:14, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Fake talk page? That user does appea rto have made three edits (though all on one day). Also how can they have edit warred when they appear to have only posted it once (and maybe on other time on the 'fake' tallk page (are you susgesting that hentaiuser1000 is a SPA?). I was under the impresion that a user did actaully have to edit war to be blocked for edit warring (not just saying please don't do something. I also note that the comment fro the fake account (afterall if the talk page is fake so mnuct be the account) on Les-sex-prac is still there. I also feel tnat bloking the user from his own talk page was unfaur given that he does not appear to have been that at fault. I would susgest that he is allowed to appeal this.Slatersteven (talk) 16:21, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * He was blocked because he edit warred over his wholly disruptive comments and then, after being warned, made them again on that other talk page. His talk page access was removed because after being blocked, he made the same post again here (that was at least the fourth time). He knew spot on what he was doing. The 55 hour block may not be long enough, but hopefully it will be enough to stop him from this kind of disruption. It's ok to ask him to cite a source for that, but I truly don't think verifiability was on his mind. Gwen Gale (talk) 16:32, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Forgive but here I can see only one post from the user [] made at 22:41, 26 November 2010, which cannot constitute an edit war. I also see no evidence that he posted the same comment on his mown talk page. He does not repost the comment on his talk page that I can see, his only two posts seek to justify his actions (or at least ask you to stop removing his posts (one made after you blocked his account, ands in no way can been seen as edit warring). As to the other talk page as I cannot see what and when he posted I have to ask other admis to look into this, as such I shall post an ANI.Slatersteven (talk) 16:39, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

He was also editing as User_talk:81.174.206.69. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:22, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

ILocereadhair are you the IP address mentioned here?Slatersteven (talk) 17:29, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

ANI
An ANI that you are involded in has been started.Slatersteven (talk) 16:51, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

People's Party
The article didn't explain why the subject was important: political parties aren't always important. Moroever, you should be aware that another article about the same party was deleted six months ago; see Articles for deletion/English People's Party. Nyttend (talk) 20:11, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Leicester Council election, 2011


The article Leicester Council election, 2011 has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Very under referenced for the content on the page. Main results covered on Leicester City Council and therefore better suited there.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Hasteur (talk) 18:08, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Carlist Party, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Basque Country (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) 10:47, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Sinéad O'Connor
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Sinéad O'Connor, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Hohenloh + 02:07, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Stoke-on-Trent local elections


The article Stoke-on-Trent local elections has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Details one minor ward by-election... thats it

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. EchetusXe 11:08, 8 January 2013 (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) 14:26, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

March 2017
Hello, I'm Edison. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Capital punishment have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Edison (talk) 22:03, 16 March 2017 (UTC)