User talk:Titanic225

Hello. This is Titanic225. Please edit this talk page.

Your contributed article, A unknown place


Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, A unknown place. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Event horizon. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Event horizon – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent 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. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Tckma (talk) 15:43, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of A unknown place
Hello Titanic225,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged A unknown place for deletion, because it doesn't seem to have any encyclopedic content.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks, Danrok (talk) 16:05, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

September 2012
Hello, I'm WikiDan61. I noticed that you recently made an edit to Sponge (material) that seemed to be a test. Your test worked! If you want more practice editing, the sandbox is the best place to do so. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:11, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Please fill out our brief Teahouse guest survey
Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback! We have created a brief survey meant to help us better understand the experience of new editors on Wikipedia. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests pages sometime in the last few months.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

Jonathan and Sarah, Teahouse hosts 02:23, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Inappropriate warnings
Please be careful handing out vandalism warnings for actions that are not vandalism. In this case you warned a user about vandalizing their own user talk page, presumably because they had remove prior warnings. Removing prior warnings from one's own user talk page is a perfectly acceptable action, and should not be labeled as vandalism. Nor should any edits made to the Sandbox, except such edits that are blatantly attack pages. The sandbox exists solely for the purpose of allowing users to try out any editing that they wish to. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:17, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Please explain
Can you please explain this edit, in which you accused at 07:52, 13 October 2012 (UTC), of edit warring on Titanic II, when the last edit on Titanic II (as of this writing) was made at 23:35, 12 October 2012 (UTC), and the warned user had not edited the page in over a month?

An edit war is an ongoing dispute: actions that occurred a month ago, and have been resolved, do not constitute an edit war. Handing out warnings like this (especially to IP editors, who may never see them as their IP addresses may well change by the next time they come to Wikipedia) is pointless. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:24, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Please stop
Perhaps you need to stop handing out warnings for a bit until you better understand how Wikipedia works. You warned about adding defamatory content to Ununennium, but that user has never edited that article. Handing out such arbitrary and incorrect warnings is considered its own form of vandalism. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:31, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Sandbox
Hi there - you do not own the sandbox. You also appear to be mis-using Twinkle. If you wish for material to remain, why not create your own sandbix - simply start one at User:Titanic225/Sandbox. Regards, GiantSnowman 13:44, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle Notice
Hi Titanic225! Thank you for your contributions! I noticed you reverted 122.106.52.125's edit to remove the warnings on there talk page. User's can remove user warnings if they want and it isn't a violation to do that. Just wanted to tell you, because I reverted your edit's on that. Happy editing --Webclient101 (talk) 22:59, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Sandbox categorization
I have restored User 777sms' version of your sandbox. That user was correct in hiding the category on your sandbox page. User sandboxes should not be categorized, since they should not appear in category lists. Only published pages should appear in such lists. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 11:48, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Juan Cruz Alvaro Armada
Hello Titanic225. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Juan Cruz Alvaro Armada, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A1 does not apply, context and subject are quite clear - it's about this footballer; moreover, he plays for a senior enough team to pass WP:NFOOTY. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 17:06, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Excessive biteyness
This was excessively bitey. A level 1 warning would have been appropriate; an immediate level 4 -- no so much. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:14, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Warnings
Hi mate, I notice you have received a number of notes from various people asking you not to issue warnings to other (especially new) editors without due cause. I am concerned that a number of people are quickly forming the view that you are not here to build Wikipedia, but rather to be disruptive or unnecessarily aggressive. Edits like this one and this one are not really appropriate. This edit referring to User:SAADWWE's edit as "vandalism" is also not appropriate. SAADWWE removed content from an article that was displaying error messages because a template had been used incorrectly. Perhaps the user could have been asked to WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM instead, but reverting the removal citing "vandalism" is both inaccurate and border-line harassment. You have ignored repeated (and very civil) requests and comments from other editors. If you continue to ignore messages from other editors and continue to edit disruptively you may be blocked from editing. If you are genuinely here to contribute constructively, there are a number of editors who would be more than happy to help you do so. If not, there are a number of editors who would be more than happy to refer your activity to admins, myself included. Happy to discuss. Stalwart 111  (talk) 23:51, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. – Connormah (talk) 20:51, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

End of the periodic table
I have found many sources claiming that there is an end that lies in between z = 170 and Z = 210, and there are very few claiming that the table is indefinite. If you can find any sourses stating reasons why there can exist element 211 or higher please let me know, otherwise listing elements so high is misleading and has no factual value.

Robo37 (talk) 14:38, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Encyclopædia Britannica
 * Competition Science Vision
 * The Periodic Table, pg. 71


 * But are there any reasons for the end lying between Z = 170 and Z = 210 either? That's also not a very specific end, so it's hard to say where we should stop the table. Double sharp (talk) 06:27, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

A 814-element periodic table can be found here.
Extended Periodic Table This is a good website, and none other webpages show so much elements.
 * And how is that relvent, given that most of these elements can never exist? Robo37 (talk) 16:30, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Blocked for sockpuppetry
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for operating vandalism-only sockpuppets, as ✅ by checkuser and your account creation log. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:39, 29 October 2012 (UTC)