User talk:Warsilver

In response to your feedback
Hello! I understand, but these people need to know that they have to put correct information with correct citations. Your doing the right thing, don't feel bad! Thanks for your feedback. Have a great day! (:

Webclient101 (talk) 18:12, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

&#160;

Vanier Cup
The picture in question has been in the article for several years ad nobody has objected to it before you. It's inclusion achieves a few things: It shows another team from a different conference with the cup, it shows a Cup winning team from the 2000s (the previous one is from the 90s) and it shows a bit more of the presentation ceremony than the other image. Yes, it's a bit blurry, but it's not horrible. When viewed at a smaller resolution, it doesn't look bad. I can only assume that you believe you should have the final say on all content...

And next time, don't cite essays to me. Essays aren't policy, so they have no bearing. -- Scorpion 0422  22:38, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hec Crighton Trophy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Éric Lapointe (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 17:36, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

GSP
Dana White is not a judge. The people on MMAfighting are journalists, not judges. The opinion of the referee is relevant, he was the only other person in the ring, and he had the best view.  Enigma msg  16:53, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Warning
Your recent editing history 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.  Enigma msg  16:57, 26 November 2013 (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) 16:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)