User talk:SuperAnth

Image copyright problem with File:Keith Laumer younger.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Keith Laumer younger.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright 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 STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 15:36, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:BoloOld2.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:BoloOld2.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright 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 STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:02, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Ninya Mae Perna Miss Nevada 1997.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Ninya Mae Perna Miss Nevada 1997.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Skier Dude ( talk ) 02:52, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Demonstrating patience and good sense
Thank you for getting a third-party opinion regarding your insertion on Battle of Gettysburg. I chose to stay out of the content dispute, urging you instead to seek consensus. I watched your animation and enjoyed it, but understand why Hal would prefer the link stay out. Bottom line is that linking to our own created content off-wiki can tend to give the appearance of self-interest, despite our best intentions. Please don't let this minor rebuff stand between you and your honest intention to improve the pedia. If I can be of any assistance feel invited to contact me via my talk page. Good luck and don't be easily discouraged. BusterD public (talk) 20:06, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

August 2012
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Dharma Initiative, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. -- Doniago (talk) 15:13, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Cave Johnson (Portal)
I'm sorry but you need reliably published sources (such as news articles, interviews) supporting your claim, photos won't cut it.  Я ehevkor ✉  00:55, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

November 2012
Your recent editing history at Cave Johnson (Portal) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Please discuss this issue on the talk page. –  Richard  BB  12:52, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry if I was misunderstood
I was listing examples of things that may be true, but are not verifiable and this cannot be used here, even if we both agree that they are undoubtedly true. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  19:27, 29 November 2012 (UTC)