User talk:VS6507/Archive 5

Huggle
I noticed several false positives in your recent reverts, including and. Please be careful and ensure to take enough time to review changes before reverting. Thanks, Prodego  talk  05:44, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. I'll be more careful. Vs6 507 05:45, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Reply
+1 Petrb (talk) 18:56, 22 November 2015 (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) 14:02, 24 November 2015 (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) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Ports of Nepal?
Please see my comments on proposals re Category:Ports of Nepal Hugo999 (talk) 23:29, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of VPNBook


A tag has been placed on VPNBook, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, 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. (See section A7 of 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 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Jonnymoon96 (talk) 14:07, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of VPNBook


The article VPNBook has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * this article is mainly advertising and promotion of vpnbook

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Jonnymoon96 (talk) 23:51, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of VPNBook for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article VPNBook 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/VPNBook 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. Jonnymoon96 (talk) 22:27, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Avicii
I mean no harm and I put an edit summary. The Sun is a tabloid and is known for unreliable sourcing, it's in a National Enquirer kind of bracket. I was putting the information from the Variety source (and removing the correlation between his alcohol abuse and death unless a coroner confirms it) when there was an edit conflict, but that is expected at this time of heavy editing. Harambe Walks (talk) 22:42, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Fucking anal listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Fucking anal. Since you had some involvement with the Fucking anal redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Raymond1922 (talk) 00:08, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Email
Hi. I got your email. However, I'm not sure exactly what you're asking. If you're having trouble editing, you should include your IP address in the email so I can check it out. First, I'd suggest you try disabling any proxies or VPNs, which are usually what causes problems. If you want to use a hard blocked VPN to edit Wikipedia, you can request IP block exempt. This is a user right given to trusted editors who demonstrate a need. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:08, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Substed template message
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.  G M G  talk  22:04, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.


 * Thank you for your effort for "writing" this message to me. Well, what noticeboard would that be? Vs6507 22:14, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

December 2018
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous). Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. 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:. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:56, 21 December 2018 (UTC)