User talk:Paul75

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Fr a ncs2000 23:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Cleanup Taskforce
I hope you don't mind, but I was bold and did some setup on your desk. Also, you have been assigned the article English Heritage. Please look at the article and either accept or let me know and I'll reassign it. Thank you. RJFJR 04:54, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, you already knew you had that because you assigned it. And I was at a wrong subpage which was why it didn't seem to be setup (I redirected that page to your real desk, again - I hope you don't mind.) RJFJR 05:10, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Since you asigned it to yourself, I'll assume you accept the article English Heritage. Thank you.RJFJR 02:59, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I finally got the taskforce subpage for No Exit (Blondie album) working (the comments were on an incorrectly named page and the correctly named page was blank). Since you are working on that article would you also like to work on the Blondie (band) article? (Which I notice you submitted to the taskforce and which has been assigned though the editor it was assigned to hasn't gotten to it yet). RJFJR 03:33, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the problem is off hand. Note, however, that to a degree the names are case sensitive. If you use the copy and paste technique for grabbing article names it should take care of spelling and capitalization. Does that help? RJFJR 20:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Hung Up
I just wanted to warn you about what may happen when you attempt to clean up this article. I gave it a go a few months ago, but a circle of Madonna fans reacted negatively to any attempts to reduce the amount of info; as can be seen on Talk:Hung Up, they reverted me without any discussion and became rather uncivil, so I just gave up on it. That said, I know I would appreciate any attempts to cut down this bloated-beyond-belief article. Extraordinary Machine 23:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Madonna (entertainer)
I have unprotected the Madonna article. - Mark 03:55, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Blondie
Thanks for your comments about the Blondie article. I hope to do some more with it when I have some more time. Rossrs 15:40, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Gus Black
A tag has been placed on Gus Black, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be a biographical account about a person, group of people, or band, but it does not indicate how or why he/she/they is/are notable. If you can indicate why Gus Black is really notable, I advise you to edit the article promptly, and also put a note on Talk:Gus Black. Any admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles. You might also want to read our general biography criteria. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that admins should wait a while for you to assert his/her/their notability, please affix the template  to the page, and then immediately add such an assertion. It is also a very good idea to add citations from reliable sources to ensure that your article will be verifiable. Irongargoyle 02:06, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup Taskforce
How are the projects on your desk going? RJFJR 15:46, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm just checking in to see how things are going with the articles on your desk. I've got an article on British hip hop if you are interested. RJFJR 22:23, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Tags
Cleanup taskforce tags are usually put on the talk page of an article. Please use edit summaries. RJFJR 23:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Video 040b.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Video 040b.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 10:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Chard, Somerset
Would you like to tell me why you reverted my edits please? It looked fine to me? FYI Template:Infobox England place with map redirects to Template:Infobox England place. The use of co-ordinates is a newer addition to the template than MapX and MapY. IMHO: 1. It is a better contrasting map. 2. It is easier for users to edit than MapX MapY. 3. The use of co-ordinates is useful as it allows the article to link into other applications such as Google Earth. Pit-yacker 00:59, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Agnes-strickland-1-sized.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Agnes-strickland-1-sized.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 03:04, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

RE Kat of Aragon
As per your request I've left my comments on the talk page. Thanks for notifying me. Walton monarchist89 10:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Mw06106.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Mw06106.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 02:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Nelly Furtado article
Hi Paul, I edited the Nelly Furtado article, per your cleanup request. Is it looking any better now? --Otheus 21:48, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Irish American
Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --Vintagekits 19:06, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * If you add unsourced POV comments like that then it will be considered nonsense!--Vintagekits 20:56, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Richard Marx Edits
Hello... I know that you are a fan of Madonna and I realize that you may not like Richard Marx, but please refrain from leaving uncited POV edits such as the ones you left on the Rush Street and Richard Marx articles. I've reverted the edits. Thank you for, hopefully, understanding and have a wonderful week. --Candy156sweet 05:48, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Clarification
Thank your for taking the time to respond to me. I want to clarify something about your edits on the Richard Marx and Rush Street articles. I know that you mean well, but calling a song vicious is a point of view statement. I can understand your view of the track. In fact, I think the same thing, but our opinions are not relevant to the article at all. Those types of statements should be kept private and not on Wikipedia, because editing like that is just as bad and is not informative in any way. I cleaned up the edits by leaving the fact without the excess bias and I've left the appropriate citations you've posted. Enjoy your weekend... --Candy156sweet 22:04, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

The 'high paid trash' portion of your edit was not quoted within the source link you provided. If the lyric was within that quote, it could've been used in your edit. I cleaned it up again, and left the 'pop star' edit you made. Thanks for being such a trooper about this. Take care and have a good week. --Candy156sweet 15:33, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

You still had bias within the edit. I fixed it again. Richard Marx explained that he wrote the track about Madonna, but he did not say that she was 'high paid trash' in that quote or any other quote that referred to that song. Lyrics and direct quotes are distinctly different. I will continue to revert the article if you continue to make that same edit. If you are interested in finding out more information about Marx's feelings on Madonna, ask him. Every month they take questions for a section called Ask Richard. Again, enjoy your week... --Candy156sweet 19:25, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Please re-register
 Hello, ! You are receiving this notice because the Cleanup Taskforce has been inactive, as a result of this all active taskforce members are being asked to re-register.

For more information see: Cleanup Taskforce/Not Dead Yet

If you do not re-register here within 15 days of receiving this notice your name will be removed from the membership list (if you were unable to reply to this notice in time, you can just add you name back).

RJFJR 00:42, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup Taskforce
There are three articles on your desk. Please look at them and determine if they are ready to be closed, need further work or are outside your area of expertise. Blondie has a GA assessment so may be ready to be closed. I'm not sure about the rest. Let me know if you want me to reassign any of them or if you are ready for some new projects. Thank you. RJFJR 15:50, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sophierimheden.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Sophierimheden.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:01, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup Taskforce
Please feel free to assign yourself tasks from the list of unassigned tasks at Cleanup Taskforce. Arranging assignments is too much work for me to do by myself. We have a large backlog of unassigned tasks and there is probably something in there that will interest you. RJFJR 22:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

completed
James Martin (Australian soldier) Messy, many contradictory statements Paul75 18:50, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi - I have assigned myself your request - see how it looks for the moment - any comments or suggestions? docboat (talk) 12:02, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

List of supercouples
I agree that this article is troublesome, and it doesn't seem necessary as a separate entity from the main article on supercouple. However, I'd appreciate it if you'd refactor your comment on my talk page. Calling editors crazies isn't helpful at all. AniMate 00:20, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you.  AniMate  00:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Sami Brady
Hi, I've just reverted your tense edits to Sami Brady because the Manual of Style establishes present tense for fiction. WP:SOAPS has an ongoing effort to make all of our articles conform, and just yesterday another user begain working on that article and changed first few secstions (she still has to do 2006 on). Thanks. &mdash; TAnthonyTalk 00:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

The accursed list of supercouples
I'd appreciate it if you didn't leave the article, though I think all of us are on the verge of throwing in the towel. I contacted a neutral admin that has had very positive interactions with Flyer and KellyAna in the past for a third opinion about the direction of the article and the Mount Holyoke source. Hopefully things will be smoothed over with some good advice and we can all drop our adversarial stances. You really should look at the List of fictional anti-heroes. It has many of the same problems as the supercouple list, and I'd normally be more than willing to take my weedwacker to it, but I'm literally drawing 14 hours a day thanks to a mindblowingly stupid deadline change. Flyer suggested, and though Wikipedia isn't consistent, it could really benefit from some help. Think about it, and also please continue on with the supercouple malarkey. AniMate 10:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry things went south so quickly. Lists aren't my favorite thing either, though I do think they have their place when they're structured with well defined parameters. KellyAna's attitude is unfortunate, but equally unfortunate is the tone of some of your comments on my talk page. Let's try to focus on the article rather than the contributors. AniMate  21:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I at least accept your apology. I don't think collaboration with KellyAna is possible (according to her). My removal of the "notable wave" and "disputed by rivalry" sections made her furious, despite assertions by myself and Flyer22 that it made the article more acceptable to Wikipedia standards. Rather than antagonize someone who is so easily infuriated, we can focus on the list as Flyer22 and (perhaps) Elonka are still willing to work on it. Try not to contact KellyAna anymore, as she is determined to be angry with you and her reactions are just going to get angrier and angrier. I'm not going to try and tell you to avoid articles she has worked on, but if you find yourself in another conflict with her contact me or Elonka to help mediate. Neither of you handle conflict well at all and neither seems very willing to back down, so make sure if you find yourself butting heads with her at another article that you get help to calm the situation. Ani  Mate  20:55, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Breaking the cycle
Hi, I'm trying to break a steady spiral of incivility between multiple editors. But it seems as soon as I get a few of them calmed down, someone else comes in and stirs things up again. This particular comment of yours (even if you feel it was true) was not helpful. I can sympathize if you are feeling frustrated with the situation, but generating attacks of that nature at another editor, is not the right way to handle things. About all it does is give one editor (yourself) some momentary pleasure in venting. But it is completely ineffective in terms of changing anyone else's behavior, and indeed, tends to escalate things, rather than de-escalate. Can I please ask you to try and adopt a better standard of behavior in the future? I firmly believe that the best way to handle things here, is for those editors with the capacity for mature behavior, to "practice what they preach" and provide a very civil example. Then those without such capacity can be encouraged (and if necessary coerced) to emulate it. Thanks, Elonka 23:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * This comment, too, was completely unacceptable. Doesn't matter who this is said to,  or what you think they did to deserve it, this kind of "pull your head out of your arse" language is not to be used on Wikipedia. --Elonka 23:59, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Catherine of Aragon
"Paul75" I am British and in everything I have read it is spelt with a "C" and my teacher(who is British) taught us to spell it like that Chloe2kaii7 (talk) 09:52, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer review archived
I archived Peer review/Supercouple/archive1 as Peer review is not for dispute resolution. Please see the Peer review Request removal policy. Sorry and please try WP:RfC or other dispute resolution processes. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:07, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * If it had even just been your comments I would have left it on WP:PR, but when the dispute spilled over into the peer review it was clear it was a fairly serious dispute, so the PR rules kicked in. Sorry again, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:00, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Don't Cry for Me, Argentina
Capitalizing "For" in the song title is contrary to Wikipedia naming conventions, so I have returned the page (and all its redirects) to the original title. Further, if you ever want to change a page's title in future, please use the Move feature of the Wikipedia software, rather than copying and pasting text. --Russ (talk) 13:43, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Regarding these edits:
Could you perhaps be a little more specific in your references, and follow the suggestions at WP:CITE? As they stand, your references mean little, as I'm stuck wondering exactly what 'Bectu' is, and how I can find more information, let alone the reference you cite. Cheers, Talk Islander 22:36, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

August 2008
Hello. 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. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Beeblbrox (talk) 22:04, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Explanation and apology
Saying "if you continue to make personal attacks on me, accusing me of bias and implying I deliberately set about to destroy your articles, I will take this matter further" is a threat. Do not threaten me.

That said, I cannot help it that I feel you are biased when it comes to these articles. Yes, we clashed on the Supercouple and List of fictional supercouples articles, and I know what you said during those clashes. I also know that the deletion of an article here at Wikipedia should not be about opinion; it should be about whether the article has merit to stand on its own. The Reese Williams and Bianca Montgomery article clearly did/does and yet you still "voted" Delete. In fact, you did not change your Delete "vote" even after the article was fixed up by Rocksey. I mean, what am I supposed to think of your involvement in that deletion debate? Even the editor who nominated that article for deletion saw that he was wrong after it provided notability and was fixed up by Rocksey. I later fixed it up even more after that. Saying "disagreeing with your opinion does NOT mean I am biased. If that was the case I would have clashed with you with over every single soap opera article you have ever been in involved in." also does not make me think that differently about you on this matter. I mean, we would have likely agreed on a lot regarding the soap opera articles I have been involved in here, considering that most of these soap opera articles are a mess. It is not like I have fixed up every soap opera article I have ever been involved in here.

I do not see criticism or suggestions on some soap opera-related articles as some kind of unspeakable crime. You remember, don't you, that I was open to the changes you wanted to make to the List of fictional supercouples article? It was one of the two fellow editors maintaining that article with me that acted like you were doing an unspeakable crime. In fact, I thank you for stumbling across that article and doing what you did to help it, even the way you started out there by nominating it for deletion when it was simply List of supercouples. I even later thanked you and AniMate then.

I do apologize, Paul, for making you feel like public enemy #1. I do not want to continue to have you as an enemy here, and I sometimes like your strict attitude regarding some of these articles. Flyer22 (talk) 19:12, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Invite to Somerset wikiproject
 Hello, this is an invitation to join WikiProject Somerset.

You may be interested in joining WikiProject Somerset. This WikiProject aims to improve the standard of all articles relating to Somerset, which includes all subdivisions of the county, major buildings, roads and other related articles.

You can help by:
 * Creating new articles.
 * Expanding stubs.
 * Adding photographs.
 * Referencing articles.
 * Research topics.
 * Anything else really...

For more information, see the project page, and if you have any questions you can leave them at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Somerset and someone will get back to you.  Thanks for your comments on my talk page - you don't have to live in Somerset to join the wikiproject.&mdash; Rod talk 07:34, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

RE : AfD problems
Thanks for bringing this up for discussion. Dropping a note on his talkpage like how you explained the situation to me would be good. Or just one response to his comment on one of the AfDs. While it doesn't warrant removal from the AfD, personally I don't think other editors would really take his "first blood" kind of comment seriously. - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 05:29, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Web of Fear Rumour
Paul, Please desist from posting rumours on the Doctor Who missing episodes page. There are more rumours than missing episodes, this one in particular seems to be the same one which still has people fighting and finger pointing two years after a formerly reputable news site lost its reputation over. MartinSFSA (talk) 12:06, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I thank you for your thank you. The polite thing, since you ask, would have been to read the talk page and seen these nonsense rumours are a common problem. Just because you acted in good faith doesn't mean it's real or not stupid. Or in good faith.
 * And I am being polite, in assuming both your good faith and calling it a "rumour". MartinSFSA (talk) 03:30, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Companions casting
I've been away from Wikipedia for a while - according to whom are pre-transmission sources not acceptable and why? It was fine when Billie Piper, John Barrowman, Catherine Tate and Freema Agyeman were cast. Surely when the BBC publish this information through reputable outputs in order to garner publicity for the episode it becomes notable? Both Michelle Ryan and Lindsay Duncan are currently relatively high-profile actresses and Bernard Cribbins is already associated with Doctor Who. The information is out there, confirmed by those in authority over this issue - why not let Wikipedia reflect this now? Wolf of Fenric (talk) 12:04, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/The Rain Tapes (2nd nomination)
As previous nominator of this article for deletion, please note the above. Black Kite 21:02, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:GHV2 alt.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:GHV2 alt.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:00, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Miles Away
Please donot delete sourced information from any article as you did to the one above. If any information is sourced in the body it doesnot need to be sourced in lead per WP:LEAD. --Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 14:53, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|25px]] Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. You are continuously deleting content from a Good article. Sourced content in teh body doesnot need to be sourced in WP:LEAD. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 09:03, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If you disagree with the GA, or the sentence construction, you are welcome for a GA reassessment or explaining yourself at the talk page regarding what you think to be poorly written, however deleting a whole portion without rephrasing is obviously consired as vandalism and hence the warning. Mind, that the article already passed GA and the reviewer didnot find any discrepancy or poor writing with it. This is not a fan writing or anything. It clearly comes from critics and reviewers who have expressed their opinion about the song. Amongst all, the general opinion was about the song's frankness about Madonna's feelings and ballady nature. Hence that is there in the LEAD. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 09:16, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * You didnot change it rather deleted the whole structure. Also, as I said before, tweaking is one thing and deleting under controversial pretext is another. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 09:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If you are talking about this one, you deleted the main critical review for the song, and kept the subordinate one. Do you think that is valid? WP:LEAD clearly states that an encompassing of the most poignant parts of the article is needed to be put there, hence can you justify removing the most important review? --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 10:11, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Paul75! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot notifying you on behalf of the the unreferenced biographies team that 1 of the articles that you created  is currently tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 08:36, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Nick Page (comedian) -

Eleanor Hibbert
Dear Paul, what are you actually doing here? I agree that British titles could come first, but I think it's a mistake to erase alternative titles just for being American. I should think about two-thirds of her readers were American. Please confirm that you have read this and explain what policy you are pursuing on this and why. Cheers, Brian Bmcln1 (talk) 07:16, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce/SAMANTHAFOX


Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

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; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Mhiji 21:19, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Born This Way
Do not just revert my edits to the chart performance section. Information pertaining to what held the song off from the top spot is something essential. Do you not think about what song kept Mother Monster from the top? I have seen this on many GAs. -- ĈÞЯİŒ  1ооо  21:58, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

XD You're telling me to read the guidelines?! Seriously?? Anyway, this matter has already been resolved. And I do have the right to tell you to not revert my edits because if you continue to excessively revert. It sounds more like you just don't want something against the song so you remove that it had competitors. Have you not read WP:VANDALISM and WP:BIAS. :) -- ĈÞЯİŒ  1ооо  12:06, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

How dare you accuse me of going against Wikipedia policies and not knowing them. I read POV many months ago-I've been here for almost 8 months. Furthermore, all those guidelines you pointed out were hardly relevant to our discussion. On top of that, I have hardly made any edits to the article anyway. -- ĈÞЯİŒ  1ооо  21:51, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Because I just looked through the history of BTW and saw that you removed Lil-Unique's compromise. Your edits regarding this issue are on the verge of becoming disruptive. -- ĈÞЯİŒ  1ооо  15:24, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

GAR
When you raise a GAR, both the nominator as well as the reviewer are supposed to be informed of this. Don't you understand the guidelines or you are unaware that such a thing exists? If so, please refer WP:GA/R for your future endeavors. — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 09:42, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19
Hi. When you recently edited Bananarama, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Venus (song) and Cruel Summer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 04:30, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Witanhurst, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Buildings at Risk Register (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Immaculate Collection, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Girlie Show. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:37, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Historic Ireland Preservation Trust


The article Historic Ireland Preservation Trust has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Not notable"

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. Mccapra (talk) 21:16, 8 February 2019 (UTC)