User talk:MickTravis If

February 2019
Hello, MickTravis If. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:41, 27 February 2019 (UTC)


 * If you restore long lists of non notable people to a Wikipedia article again, I'll ask that this account be blocked, and the article be protected against further edits. Thank you, 2601:188:180:1481:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:55, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Edit warring
Your recent editing history at List of Old Emanuels shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. IronGargoyle (talk) 02:07, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Group Captain George Darley moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Group Captain George Darley, 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.  Owlf  20:35, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Really forget it: I'm deleting it, this is awful I mean Wikipedia 'editors' being self-appointed and knowing nothing at all about random subjects they decide they'll change and then threaten anyone disputing that with blocking their account. I hardly use it anyway, having better things to do and not being a hobbyist pedant in the US - where sure enough, these fools are usually from

Again Welcome!
Hello, MickTravis If, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

Seemed like you are disappointed by something. I have seen you writing comments on other talk page, please review and then publish it so that other user can understand what you are trying to say. WP:Teahouse is the best place to ask any questions that you are having any problem or just don't get it. You can even ask questions such as why my edit was reverted or articles are deleted. I have asked many questions there and got satisfaction. We are editing wikipedia because we are volunteering something that people just ignore. Just play around and stick to policy and guidelines of Wikipedia all will be ok. You are just close away to be blocked from editing, im requesting you to go through every link that i have given below. Happy editing....

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: 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 Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Rocky 734 (talk) 02:03, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Personal Commentary does NOT belong inline visible in the article. That is what the talk page is for.
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Your commentary about the lawsuit counts being inaccurate do NOT belong IN the article Post-election lawsuits related to the 2020 United States presidential election. Tell me, have you ever opened an encyclopedia to read an article with the note "Note: I think the editors screwed up on this article, but someone else should fix it" - NO you never have, and neither does your note belong visible to the public in a Wikipedia article either. I have added your note to the article talk page where it belongs, and this is a vehement warning to you to stop vandalizing pages. I see from prior messages that you have made similar edits, so consider this your final warning. Your Wikipedia privileges are at risk from continued behavior like this. Timmccloud (talk) 22:17, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

My edits on Wikipedia *do not* include vandalism, nor do I "keep vandalizing pages". I posted the comment about the list of election lawsuits being inaccurate where I did because there appeared no other way of saying that to the author. It is inaccurate and the article accurately states the real total of 86 in its opening paragraph. The Supreme Court in Washington DC has also now brought an end to these, yet the 54 total remains as does the list of seven still outstanding under "Appeal ongoing" or "Trial ongoing". I left the note rather than change this because altering it would no doubt have been called 'vandalism', and the entry has been very accurate for the three months it has existed and been regularly updated: it appears to be the hard work of a single author, so I don't consider it appropriate for me or anyone else to edit it, although the nature of Wikipedia often involves many different people contributing. I do not however, call anyone editing something I have authored "vandalism" because I object to them doing so.

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) 01:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 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 2023 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) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)