User talk:Mr B Bond

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name 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) 09:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Enochian Theory and the (band) suffix
Adding the suffix to the article would be out of line with Wikipedia policy, which states that suffixes such as that should be used only if there is another topic requiring the original title- that is the reason I am currently discussing the matter with Edison. As there is nothing else known as 'Enochian Theory', the band's article is welcome to stay at that title, providing it is notable. I will take another look at the AfD debate and the article now, to see whether I consider it so. J Milburn (talk) 12:49, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Expanding the references with as much detail as possible would help to verify the information in the article as well as the notability of the band, and so would be advisable if possible. J Milburn (talk) 19:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review of Enochian Theory
Hi! I noticed you asking elsewhere about how to reinstate a deleted article you think can be fixed based on new information. If you think you can create it yourself, and aren't simply recreating exactly the same thing, I think you could probably go ahead and do so. If you think your changes would be less complete, or if you want to work from the original, or if you'd like to get other peoples' opinions, or even if you're just not sure, then the best solution is to make a DRV (Deletion Review) entry for the article. If you have a success at DRV, the old version of the article will be reinstated and you can make your changes there. This also makes it less likely to be deleted again.

In any case, you should make sure you have addressed any concerns that were raised during the original deletion debate; demonstrating this at DRV is your main concern if you want to get things settled.

I do just want to note that "Article X is like this too and it's not being deleted" isn't really an argument, because probably just nobody's noticed that one yet. :-) See this essay if you want to read more about that side of things: Other Stuff Exists.

Hope that helps! -- tiny plastic Grey Knight  ⊖  11:56, 5 June 2008 (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) 13:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC)