User talk:Theblog

Am I the only one who can't make heads or tails about WP:N? Everyone seems to know what's going on, and I'm sitting in the dark trying to understand how some of these people are even getting to their conclusions. Kallimina (talk) 04:47, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Can this be used as a source?
http://www.kepl.com.au/esstu/rosmud.html

RosMud was developed for Threshold RPG, but it can be used for many games. I'm not sure how to cite a page or if it's even acceptable.

If you take a look at JediMUD, you can see it has a section on how to connect. Kallimina (talk) 19:38, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello!
Just stopping by to say hi. Kallimina (talk) 17:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey! Stopping in to say hello again. How have you been? Kallimina (talk) 16:24, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

A study on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies
Hi. I have emailed you to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change (survey described here). If interested, please email me Encyclopaedia21 (talk) 21:12, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming (3rd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:28, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of The Mud Connector for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Mud Connector 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/The Mud Connector 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. czar 03:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Aethlon Medical


The article Aethlon Medical has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * Single-product company, only source possibly satisfying GNG is a blurb on TIME.com. 6 Refs are all corp databases, press releases or press release mirrors.

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. Jergling (talk) 20:24, 16 November 2016 (UTC)