User talk:Pre101

Welcome
Hello, Pre101, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers: We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Active Banana (talk) 23:06, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Discussion take place on the Talk/Discussion pages
RE: your recent edits to WP:IAR - please use the Talk page to discuss your concerns about the policy. Thanks! Active Banana (talk) 23:11, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * and for articles, the talk page is to discuss how to improve the article, not a chat page regarding the topic of the article. Active Banana (talk) 23:16, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Atheltics
A tag has been placed on Atheltics, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

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 hangon 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Pichpich (talk) 00:00, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edits
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. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 11:13, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of talk pages
I recently posted my personal oppinionated thoughts on wikipedia regarding Athletics. later that same day I logged on t o my recently created usename page and discovered that it had deleted. Now, I do not have a problem with this due to the fac that one of the reasons specified fro deleting it was that it was and i quote "Unsalvagably incoherent" which would have left me wuite annoyed had it not been quite possibly true. But the problem i do have with this is that the reason I or the majority of people join wikipedia is for teh fact that it is something everyone that can edit. Articles that regularly become fact through personalised opinions. yet if someone spends time and potentially alot of effort into giving valuable personal opinions into an adit or any form of blog on wikipedia it should be accepted as a personal point of view but administrative deletion directly contradicts this. It also raises the question who gives an administrator these rights? who administors and administrator? and presuming the answer is an administrator or group policies written by administrators, that means that there must have been oen original administrator who became how? the answer is "Dictatorship". wikipedia is not as i thought it is not a page offering free speech and independant points of view, it is a websiet run to monitor and control the way users have the right to voice opinions on a topic. and for one reason control. I am more than aware of the fact that without some form of order this would leave wikipedia on the brink of demise, but undeniably it would be today one of two things; A virtual den of inequety, where masses of ruthlessly posted malicious conent was left intentionally to insult. or it would be a noble source of inspiration and free speech for anyone who has ever suffered adversity, to voice strongly their opinions on things which they take the time to offer as advice or inspiration for everyone else who hasn't got to typing it yet.

Your contributed article, Olympic games archive
Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Olympic games archive. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as yourself. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Olympic Games. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will to continue helping improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Olympic Games - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, 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 hangon 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Pichpich (talk) 15:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

my earlier blog on the dispute dof athletics in the world of the olympic community is that I was in no way trrying to give the impression i was of knowledgable advesaries ont he matter i was merely stating that i am a fan of the fact that steve prefontaine who i mentioned so many times inthe artice not to the edelight of some of the other afformentioned "administrators that reside themselves purely on the ffact that they were applied with the ability to discredit or even dismiss personal opinions that are posted by more liberal memebers of this so called opinion based website. people put in good tieme and passion in to writing about things which have affected them and if wikipedia is not such a place anymore then i no longer want to be a part of it.
 * Original research and personal opinions are not a part of Wikipedia, and if you wish to be a part of Wikipedia, you will have to abide by the those guidelines. If you want to promulgate your personal opinions and research, you will indeed need to do that outside of Wikipedia. Active Banana (talk) 17:37, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Regarding your edits
It appears that you are a bit confused over what Wikipedia is about. Wikipedia is not a place to publish your personal opinions on various matters. I recommend that you review the following links that may help you understand what Wikipedia is about and why your articles and edits have been removed or deleted:
 * About
 * What Wikipedia is not
 * No original research
 * Talk page guidelines

-- Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:44, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

July 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Bocafan76 (talk) 19:21, 24 July 2010 (UTC)