User talk:Msmothers

Proposed deletion of Natasha Kizmet


The article Natasha Kizmet has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable actress lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. Article references are not adequate to support article and consist of primary and listing of the movie.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. red dog six (talk) 22:33, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Natasha Kizmet for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Natasha Kizmet is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Natasha Kizmet until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. red dog six (talk) 00:00, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013
Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Natasha Kizmet, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. red dog six (talk) 00:09, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

January 2014
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 Bob Enyart. Thank you.  Neil N  talk to me  03:15, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Muhammad‎ shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.  Neil N  talk to me  05:10, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Muhammad
Please see the answer to FAQ Q9 on Talk:Muhammad. You'll need to make your case on the talk page as multiple editors are reverting you. -- Neil N  talk to me  05:18, 15 January 2014 (UTC)