User talk:Plantocal

June 2007
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Sylvia Browne, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 00:30, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

U.S. Attorneys dissmissal article and Seligman
Your recent additions to Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy fail to indicate what relation the governor's prosecution and conviction has to controversy. Your addition is subject to severe edtiting, lacking sourced statments indicating how the reader is to understand there is any relationship. -- Yellowdesk 00:48, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * What needs to be sourced and I'll source it?


 * A plan hatched by the White House (according to Republicans) to use the Justice Department to go after people seems very relevant to me.

Bill Canary
Hi Plantocal. You are off to such a great start on the article Bill Canary that it may qualify to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page under the Did you know... section. Appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. However, there is a five day from article creation window for Did you know... nominations. Before five days pass from the date the article was created and if you haven't already done so, please consider nominating the article to appear on the Main Page by posting a nomination at Did you know suggestions. If you do nominate the article for DYK, please cross out the article name on the "Good" articles proposed by bot list. Again, great job on the article. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 18:38, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks I added it.
 * It appears that you added it to the wrong location. The nomination needs to be added Articles created on June 30 and you need to propose a hook for the nomination per Did you know suggestions. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 01:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Relationship to C56C?
Hello,

I have noticed that in the roughly three weeks this acccount has been active, you have edited the following pages, which have also been edited by C56C in the same period of time:


 * Fred Thompson
 * Ken Ham
 * Kent Hovind
 * Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy
 * Sylvia Browne

This is quite a coincidence. I am wondering if you have an explanation for this. There are, of course, many possible legitimate explanations. I'd just like to know what yours is.

Regards, Eseymour 14:19, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

You'll have to ask him/her why they came to Thompson article. I thought maybe I was following her/his contributions (much like I look at yours), but it appears it happened the other way around.

I went through my history and the article history: C56C's last edit on the Ham article was (21 June 2007) mine prior to his/her edit was 14 June 2007 and my most recent/only edit after that was 30 June 2007. Not really at the same time, but whatever.

As for the Hovind article, all the news about that is recent and ongoing, which is why I am editing it. C65C's first edits were 28 June 2006, so it appears she/he has had a long interest in it. Plantocal 15:56, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't like your attack, but since we are asking questions, what is your motivation behind removing only negative material in the last several weeks from that article?

Do you have any connection to Sbowers3? It goes: 23:42, 6 July 2007 by Sbowers3 then Eseymour at 21:57, 6 July 2007 and 21:18, 5 July 2007 by Eseymour then 20:29 5 July 2007 by Sbowers3. Plantocal 16:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Fred Thompson controversies
I've nominated Fred Thompson controversies, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Fred Thompson controversies satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Fred Thompson controversies and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Fred Thompson controversies during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Crockspot 05:01, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Bill Canary
I did some minor clean-up on this article today. If you can provide additional biographical data on him -- such as date of birth, residence, etc. -- that would make the article stronger. Also, since you're fairly new to Wikipedia, here are two things I wish someone had told me when I was new: Thank you again for starting the article about Canary. -- LisaSmall T/ C 12:36, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * First, please always use a tilde signature when you are on a talk page, even your own talk page. This is easy — either type out -- ~, or just click on the signature button [[Image:Button sig2.png]] located above the white window that opens up when you're editing an article. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment, without having to type out the tildes manually.
 * Second, when you're on a talk page, even your own, it's best to start an answer to a prior comment with a colon — : — which will automatically indent the answer. A second response uses two colons, ::, to indent that further. This makes pages MUCH easier to read.

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)