User talk:OneGuy


 * User talk:OneGuy/Archive 1,
 * User talk:OneGuy/Archive 2
 * User:OneGuy/Jews historical comparison (not an archive .. just a reference so I remember this has to be deleted)
 * User talk:OneGuy/Archive 3
 * User talk:OneGuy/Ignore Encryption Test

Tiger vs lion
Note you have been repeating points that have been discussed and resolved before. Animal face off is not a documentary and content and opinions in the show cannot be cited as references here, especially compared to the high standards of other sources and documentaries. All the so called reasons you used in the edit history have been discussed and resolved. You can only put that tag if you have new and valid points to support your claim, otherwise your edit is just based purely on your opinions and will be considered disruptive. Thanks. Big Cats  -   talk   20:10, 15 November 2014 (UTC)


 * You don't get to pick and choose only opinions that agree with your views. That's why the article is biased and one sided OneGuy (talk) 20:20, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
 * You certainly don't get to remove non-disputed content solely because you think some "other side" isn't also included. Blowing up the encyclopedia doesn't fix perceived neutrality problems in a way that makes the reader any better off. DMacks (talk) 21:11, 15 November 2014 (UTC)


 * How is quoting Big Cat Rescue expert opinion but discovery channel isn't? OneGuy (talk) 21:13, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
 * You're welcome to have a discussion on the article talk-page about the validity of various sources and get some consensus to include ones you feel are improperly omitted. Before you do, be sure to read the previous discussions there so you can be sure you are raising new points rather than merely rehashing reasonably-settled or tired-old arguments (I'm not making a statement about your ideas one way or the other). DMacks (talk) 21:19, 15 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I read the discussions. That's exactly the reason why I think the article is one-sided, biased, and hogged by fanboy idiots. You can't remove references that you don't like then quote "Big Cat Rescue"  and National Geographic as expert opinion. OneGuy (talk) 21:23, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Nov 2014
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Big Cats  -   talk   22:02, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.


 * Stop deleting references that disagree with your POV. Wikipedia is not a place to promotote your agenda NPOV OneGuy (talk) 22:03, 15 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I deleted the content and references as per wikipedia rules. You are the one who promotes your agenda by not adhering to wikipedia policy. NPOV has a clear definition here and is not defined by yourself.  Big Cats   -   talk   22:56, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Big Cats  -   talk   22:56, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Timeline of 6th-century Muslim history for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Timeline of 6th-century Muslim history 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/Timeline of 6th-century Muslim history 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. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:35, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Coins During Harun Rashid.JPG


The file File:Coins During Harun Rashid.JPG has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 file's talk page.

Please consider addressing 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 files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:821 births


A tag has been placed on Category:821 births requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 17:35, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:794 births


A tag has been placed on Category:794 births requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 18:04, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Shahnaz Pakravan


The article Shahnaz Pakravan has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Written like an advertisement... notability?"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Katakana546 (talk) 00:03, 22 May 2023 (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) 00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)