User talk:Sammorelikedam

March 2017
Hello, I'm Julietdeltalima. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Weede have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.  Julietdeltalima   (talk)  17:53, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at St. Catharines. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted. Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 17:59, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this warning: St. Catharines was changed by Sammorelikedam (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.959781 on 2017-03-02T17:59:24+00:00.

Please do not add or change content, as you did at St. Catharines, without citing a reliable source using an inline citation that clearly supports the material. The burden is on the person wishing to keep in the material to meet these requirements, as a necessary (but not always sufficient) condition. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:44, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sam Giesbrecht (March 6)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Sam Giesbrecht and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the or on the.
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister  talk  20:28, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Sam Giesbrecht


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Draft:Sam Giesbrecht, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

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 removed 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. Legacypac (talk) 00:33, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 23:13, 13 February 2018 (UTC)