User talk:Tarasinnott20

Caprice Bourret
Regarding edits to Caprice Bourret, you helped editing but I became concerned by so much removed, particularly references. Can you rework it with this in mind?

--UnicornTapestry (talk) 00:15, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

November 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Caprice Bourret has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you.  WAYNE  OLAJUWON 20:21, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Possible conflict of interest
Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Caprice Bourret, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.
 * This warning is in response to your claim to be her manager. Rambo's Revenge (talk)  22:58, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Caprice Bourret has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Mutinus (talk) 18:02, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Leigh arnold


A tag has been placed on Leigh arnold requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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 hang-on 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. andy (talk) 14:10, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself. Please use the template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion, and make your case on the page's talk page. Thank you. andy (talk) 14:23, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from pages that you have created yourself. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Lerdthenerd (talk) 14:32, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Please stop. Continuing to remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Leigh arnold, without resolving the problem that the template refers to may be considered vandalism. Further edits of this type may result in your being blocked from editing Wikipedia. andy (talk) 14:54, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you remove the maintenance templates from Wikipedia articles without resolving the problem that the template refers to, as you did at Leigh arnold, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.  Teapot  george Talk  15:04, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Leigh arnold, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.  Teapot  george Talk  15:05, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Leigh arnold


The article Leigh arnold has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners or ask at Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one.  Teapot  george Talk  15:21, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for sockpuppetry. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Favonian (talk) 16:53, 18 November 2010 (UTC)