User talk:J390

Welcome
Hello, J390, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and have been reverted. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

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. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on. Again, welcome! Falcon8765 (talk) 07:46, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

October 2010
Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to Glenn Beck. Thank you. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 01:56, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

You make it look like I said something POV. I just said he was opposed to illegal immigration. How is that controversial? J390 (talk) 06:01, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

April 2011
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 Nancy Drew with this edit, 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.  Kinaro (talk)'''(contribs) 20:14, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

September 2012
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 07:02, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Please stop - WP:BLP violations
You need to stop adding categories to articles about living people if there is no sourced material in the article to support the category. Please go back and revert any recent additions you have made to articles that are not verified within the article by reliable sources. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  21:44, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * None of my additions were untrue, and were well known to boot. If we can put Glenn Beck and Donald Trump in the conspiracy theorist category, of course we can put O'Donnell, Van Jones, Wright, Farrakhan, and Malloy for their advancement of theories about 9/11 or AIDS, many times being central to their biography. J390 (talk) 22:01, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * if you are here to spread the truth, you are in the wrong place. All content, but particularly potentially controversial content about living people requires the most reputable sourcing. WND fails spectacularly in "having a reputation for fact checking and accuracy". You will need to find other sources. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  22:37, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * It was a true account regardless of what you think about their other stuff. If DemocraticUnderground posted a true account of something, I'd link to them too. J390 (talk) 22:59, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia requires verifibility from reliable sources, not claims of "truth". -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  23:04, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia doesn't discriminate between sources as long as they're verifying something that actually happened. Regardless of rather it's WND, MediaMatters, our sources don't have to be neutral. J390 (talk) 23:05, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia STRONGLY differentiates between acceptable sources and random postings on the web. Content about living people requires the HIGHEST level of reliable sources. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  23:08, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * What are the definition of reliable sources? There's always going to be somebody saying one source or another is unreliable. J390 (talk) 23:09, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * if you are too lazy to read the links to the Wikipedia definitions of reliable sources that I have included in every posting on this page then I am through attempting to discuss with you. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  23:11, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Opinion and speculation are one thing, documented facts are another. If you have a problem with my additions then I dare and urge you to remove the conspiracy theorist category and the Media Matters links from the Glenn Beck article. J390 (talk) 02:56, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Please don't use that article to make a WP:POINT. See for instance . Dougweller (talk) 09:20, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The CSMonitor has a clear slant too in the opposite direction. Why would they be a reputable source but not WND? Besides, Van Jones, O'Donnell, Wright, and Malloy believe in clandestine conspiracies if that's supposed to be the justification. "A commonly used shortcut to this page is WP:POINT. However, just because someone is making a point does not mean that s/he is disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate it. As a rule, one engaging in "POINTY" behavior is making edits which s/he does not really agree with, for the deliberate purpose of drawing opposition." J390 (talk) 02:39, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Please stop removing the category. It's clear you don't agree with our policy on sources, but trying to edit this way is non-productive and may get you taken to ANI. Dougweller (talk) 19:17, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

July 2013
Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Libertarian Democrat has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Thank you. Adding such commentary about a living person as you did here is not appropriate.  – S. Rich (talk) 18:28, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * With all respect to you, it was a pretty well covered online scandal about Corzine's actions at the World Bank he was widely criticized for. You talk about me adding "misleading or inaccurate information". What's misleading and inaccurate information is claiming Obama or Corzine are at all libertarian. It's been widely demonstrated Obama is anything but. That's objective. J390 (talk) 20:44, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I was referring to the "embezzling" comment in the edit summary. The Jon Corzine article has nothing about the World Bank or embezzlement. There were civil charges, but a civil charge is far different the criminal charge of embezzlement. The criminal investigation did not lead to criminal charges. Please use caution when making statements on Wikipedia about living persons. For more information, see WP:BLP. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 21:05, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

List of Jewish states and dynasties moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, List of Jewish states and dynasties, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 03:41, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: List of Jewish states and dynasties has been accepted
 List of Jewish states and dynasties, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer. Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Sulfurboy (talk) 06:09, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=List_of_Jewish_states_and_dynasties help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

March 2020
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to List of American conservatives, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Bettering the Wiki (talk) 07:14, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Battle of Dongola (1276) moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Battle of Dongola (1276), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 02:26, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Battle of Dongola (1276)
Hello, J390. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Battle of Dongola (1276), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 03:01, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Battle of Dongola (1276) has been accepted
 Battle of Dongola (1276), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Battle_of_Dongola_(1276) help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Rusalkii (talk) 05:34, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

==Discussion at Talk:List of Jewish states and dynasties § Did attempts to change POV in this list go too far & make it more biased?== You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Jewish states and dynasties § Did attempts to change POV in this list go too far & make it more biased?. Peaceray (talk) 00:05, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 29
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of battles 301–1300, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Lake Huleh.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 29 March 2024 (UTC)