User talk:Major General Sterling Price

August 2009
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope that I don't seem unfriendly or make you feel unwelcome, but I noticed your username, and I am concerned that it might not meet Wikipedia's username policy for the following reason: Basically, unless you have, in fact, obtained the rank of Major General, your user-name will be seen as inappropriately claiming authority. If you are a Major General, we have no way of confirming this, so the problem remains.

This doesn't mean you're in trouble, however. It is possible to change your name.. After you look over that policy, could we discuss that concern here?

I'd appreciate learning your views, for instance, your reasons for wanting this particular name, and what alternative username you might accept that avoids raising this concern.

There are several options available to you:
 * We can talk about it, here.
 * You can abandon the contributions made under this name and create a new account that meets our username policy and addresses the concern(s) noted above.
 * Or, if you want to keep your contributions history under a new name, then you should visit Changing username and follow the instructions there.

If we can't resolve this on our own, we can ask for help through Wikipedia's dispute resolution process, such as requesting comments from other Wikipedians. Wikipedia administrators usually abide by agreements reached through this process. Irbisgreif (talk) 02:09, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree with your reading of the policy. Under misleading it specifically mentions Wikipedia centric examples (Admin, Check User, Sysop, etc.) and it says specifically "Misleading usernames imply relevant, misleading things about the contributor. Misleading names include those that imply you are in a position of authority over Wikipedia, or those that impersonate other people." I would argue that Major General is not relevant to Wikipedia, and implies no 'position of authority over Wikipedia'. --Falcorian (talk) 02:15, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * "Misleading usernames imply relevant, misleading things about the contributor...impersonate other people." Unless the user is, in fact, a Major General named Sterling Price, then the user-name is misleading. Irbisgreif (talk) 02:53, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I would tend to agree with Falcorian. The username policy does state fairly clearly that it is wikipedia-centric names that are targeted.  I would request an RfC on the issue.  Gosox5555 (talk) 03:16, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The keyword is of course "relevant" which I do not believe 'Major General' is to Wikipedia. --Falcorian (talk) 03:43, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Not to but into a conversation I don't care about...but...there is a Major General Sterling Price. He was a confederate general during the American Civil War. Grey Wanderer (talk) 03:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Good to know, and I have no idea how the tips it. If the person were alive or recently dead that would be one thing, but someone so historic? I'm unsure. --Falcorian (talk) 03:43, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, it would leave me unsure as well. Do you really think RfC is the place to take this? Irbisgreif (talk) 10:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Unsourced material
Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Grey Wanderer (talk) 02:34, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Confederate history of Missouri
I have nominated Confederate history of Missouri, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Confederate history of Missouri. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Grey Wanderer (talk) 02:45, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Missouri Bright Land of the West
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Missouri Bright Land of the West, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://mariah.stonemarche.org/livhis/missouri.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and 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 and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 02:42, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

November 2009
Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Missouri. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Grey Wanderer (talk) 00:48, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to List of current heads of state and government. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Alansohn (talk) 03:07, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Confederate Sates today if they won the Civil War
A tag has been placed on Confederate Sates today if they won the Civil War requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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), 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Fbifriday (talk) 00:04, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you create an inappropriate page, you will be blocked from editing. PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:16, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Confederate Sates today if they won the Civil War
A tag has been placed on Confederate Sates today if they won the Civil War requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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), 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.  Zoo Fari Thank you Wikipedia!  03:24, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text  below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.  Acroterion  (talk)  03:45, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Neutral governments
I have nominated Neutral governments, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Neutral governments. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Peripitus (Talk) 01:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)