User talk:Renfield1031

July 2014
Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Alexander Haig, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. ''You continue to add an unreferenced statement that is not WP:NPOV. Take it to the talk page and start a discussion to add it, but first find a source. Your personal opinion does not belong in an encyclopedia.'' EricSerge (talk) 23:14, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Alexander Haig. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. EricSerge (talk) 01:07, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. EricSerge (talk) 18:51, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring, as you did at Alexander Haig. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 00:44, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mongo (Blazing Saddles)


The article Mongo (Blazing Saddles) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Just not notable; the article is basically a list of what he does in the film, which is also in the film article.

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. Ged UK  13:54, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Mongo (Blazing Saddles) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mongo (Blazing Saddles) 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/Mongo (Blazing Saddles) 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. JesseRafe (talk) 21:43, 31 December 2015 (UTC)