User talk:JulianDelphiki

ER page
Hi, I just wanted to know why the change was not relevant. There has been some discussion in the main ER page and more than one person agree that the Catherine Banfield's characer is not a supporting character and yes a leading role. I've created her individual page her Catherine Banfield, so I just guessed that it wouldn't be very reasonable for her to be in those two pages. Sorry about the lame english. Cheers> Takeit10 (talk) 16:20, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, sorry, it just seemed like a big change so I assumed the worst. :) --Ender The Xenocide | ( Talk | Contribs) 16:23, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, that's all right. Just informing. Takeit10 (talk) 16:43, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Relient K
Why was the edit I made reverted? The eponymous album info doesn't belong on the band's page. There's already an article dedicated to it. Smile Lee (talk) 21:57, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * My bad --Ender The Xenocide | ( Talk | Contribs) 18:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

White-tailed deer
Hey, I just wanted to know why my deleting a link to lesbianworld.com was reverted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.71.200.13 (talk) 20:18, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Trafalgar Square
Hello. Did you notice that when reverting me a few hours ago that you brought back a vandalised version of the Trafalgar Square article? I can imagine that you did this unknowingly, possibly mistaking me for the anonomous user who deleted parts are swore in others. Either way, it's not a problem with me, so long as you know that I wasn't the author of the nonsense! Evlekis (talk) 19:42, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Andrew Fleming
Good evening. I just received a notice from you explaining that you reverted one of my changes to the wikipedia, stating it was unproductive. My change was to remove the following paragraph from the article on Andrew Fleming

"Andrew was clearly molested as a child, as is made evident by every second of his work "Hamlet 2." This mockingly self-declared refuse of artwork is a blatant attempt on his behalf to make amends with the father who we are lead to believe supposedly molested him. Other schools of thought lend to the belief that he was not actually molested, but the pleas output in his film were rather extrapolations of arcane imaginary machinations of his twisted worthless self being. Obviously a half-out homosexual, Andrew made clear his blackened "heart-soul" with the initial screening of Hamlet 2."

Please explain to me how removing obvious vandalism from wikipedia is unproductive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.122.119.140 (talk) 00:59, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Trafalgar Square Edit
Hi, I would like to ask why you removed my true and reliable edit to the "Trafalgar Square" page earlier on today, calling it a "good faith" edit and calling my sources not creditable. If it is the source you have a problem with, I have many more, including this one and this one. Please could you change the edit back with these sources. Many thanks.

92.10.31.244 (talk) 20:15, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Rollback
I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 04:45, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

CFHS

 * I don't know if you're still active, but someone is messing with the Cedar Falls High School page and went far enough to revert a ton of the edits that we made back in the day, and info that you added from The Book you have on the subject. --Ender The Xenocide | ( Talk | Contribs) 01:40, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll look into it. --vossman (talk) 02:39, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Do you recall what type of info was removed, it looks like most of it is still there. --vossman (talk) 23:31, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Love-bite
Hello Ender3989, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Love-bite has been removed. It was removed by Phil Bridger with the following edit summary ' contest prod - low article quality isn't a reason for deletion, and this is pretty obviously a notable subject '. Please consider discussing your concerns with Phil Bridger before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 19:40, 27 November 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 19:40, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

List of Jews...
You reverted my redirect of List of Jews from Ukrainian lands to List of Ukrainian Jews. You should note that the article List of Ukrainian Jews has a history extending back over four years, while List of Jews from Ukrainian lands was copied verbatim from List of Ukrainian Jews only today, based on Tatsmeyer's assertion that "there is no such thing as a Ukrainian Jew". Join the discussion on User talk:Dlohcierekim to understand the issue. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:09, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * My talk page would be fine. I'm trying to understand your seeming endorsement of this unilateral page move done without consensus by a seemingly new user whose first edit was to redirect to an entirely different list, effectively deleting the page. Dloh cierekim  17:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No prob. You just got caught up in a mess. Feel free to comment on the article talk, now that there's is actually a discussion. Dloh  cierekim  01:47, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Prod
You prodded the article, Gabriel Estor, as a "Completely unformatted and uncited article". Thanks for spotting it, & in fact it's actually much worse than that-- utter vandalism, in which a person's name was used for a heading followed by two paragraphs describing the biology of monkeys; the editor also inappropriately inserted it in another article. I have deleted all of this, and blocked the user.  DGG ( talk ) 05:13, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
22:00, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

My edit is not vandalism
I do not appreciate being the subject of false accusations of vandalism. I added information and included a link to a reliable source. Cluebot made a mistake. The continuous removal of the character's verified sexual orientation is homophobic censorship. Stop it. Matty Dean (talk) 21:18, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Most times "is gay" is a huge sign of vandalism, sorry. Please continue the discussion on the talk page --Ender The Xenocide | ( Talk | Contribs) 17:20, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

WP:AIV
First I would like to say thank you for the work you are doing regarding vandalism. I only ask that you don't report accounts that have not recently performed vandalism. A couple of account sent to AIV have the last edits from the end of June and early July. Administrators have to quickly address these reports to prevent continued disruption and reporting prior stale edits leaves the opening of us blocking punitively rather than for preventative purposes. If you have any question please feel free to ask. Kindly Calmer   Waters  19:14, 26 July 2011 (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) 14:01, 24 November 2015 (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) 14:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)