User talk:XxXDylanWillard

Welcome!

Hello, XxXDylanWillard, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Nicholas Paul James Jones, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type helpme on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Vipinhari ||  talk  11:52, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Proposed deletion of Nicholas Paul James Jones


The article Nicholas Paul James Jones 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. Vipinhari ||  talk  11:52, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Nicholas Paul James Jones


A tag has been placed on Nicholas Paul James Jones 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. Vipinhari ||  talk  11:59, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of "Shawn C. Phillips"
A page you created, Shawn C. Phillips, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how they are important or significant, and thus why they should be included in an encyclopedia. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and the guidelines for biographies in particular.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. Becky Sayles (talk) 06:30, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Shawn C. Phillips for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shawn C. Phillips 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/Shawn C. Phillips 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:30, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * All the article says when and where this person was born. Nothing else. –BuickCenturyDriver 09:00, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of M. Kelley


A tag has been placed on M. Kelley 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. Cntras (talk) 04:52, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Shawn C. Phillips


A tag has been placed on Shawn C. Phillips 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. Jay Σεβαστός discuss  10:34, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Shawn Slawson


A tag has been placed on Shawn Slawson 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. Zachlipton (talk) 06:36, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

March 2011
This is your only warning; if you create an inappropriate page again, as you did at Shawn Slawson, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Kinu t /c  06:47, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for abuse of editing privileges. 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, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Kinu t /c  07:01, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Please take this time to review our relevant guidelines on notability and what constitutes a suitable topic for an article. -- Kinu t /c  08:37, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In one of your recent edits, you added links to an article which did not add content or meaning, or repeated the same link several times throughout the article. Please see Wikipedia's guideline on links to avoid overlinking. Thank you. –BMRR (talk) 03:55, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Bob Marley
Hello XxXDylanWillard. I have reverted your change to Bob Marley. I appreciate that you probably intended this as an improvement, perhaps correcting a "mistake" in the presentation of the dates, so I wanted to draw your attention to the fact that outside the US (including Jamaica, where Marley was born) the order "day month year" is more common. The Wikipedia manual of style permits either form of date, but requires consistency within an article, and frowns on changing the existing format of dates in an article unless there is a good reason, such as a strong national tie (WP:DATERET). --ColinFine (talk) 14:40, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Over linking
Hi, I've reverted you on the articles Nicolas Cage and Michael J Fox due to overlinking. Please read up on linking so you know when to use linking and when not to. Thank you in advance, -- Crohnie Gal Talk  10:27, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

You're still not following our guidelines on linking at WP:OVERLINK. For example, United States is linked only in rare circumstances, not in biographical articles as you did here. United States is way too general an article to be helpful to a reader who is looking at an article about a singer. Thanks, Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 04:53, 17 April 2011 (UTC)


 * You are still linking the word United States. Please stop doing that. You are also making some errors in comma use. I've undone a number of your edits:    Please slow down.  Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 11:38, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Joe Jonas. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively. In particular, the three-revert rule states that: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; 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 continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 02:59, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.


 * Now you are also edit-warring at Cate Blanchett . Please see the edit warring policy. Again, be sure to understand the guidelines on overlinking common geographical countries like Australia, before continuing. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 22:02, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for continuing to edit in a disruptive manner despite multiple warnings by many editors. The changes you are making to articles run contrary to current guidelines; however of more concern is your refusal to discuss or acknowledge the concerns of other editors with regard to your editing. During the next 48 hours please take the time to read through and address the issues presented here on your talk page. 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, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 13:19, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

The block expired. And now, in edits like this, you continue to ignore Wikipedia guidelines, even though multiple editors have expressed concern at your talk page. If you continue, the next block will be for much longer than 48 hours. It's a shame, as some of your edits really are quite helpful. Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 00:16, 25 April 2011 (UTC)


 * So you continued. So you're blocked again, for two weeks this time. Ponyo already offered good advice, so I won't repeat that here. You can request unblocking as noted above. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 00:23, 25 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Fpr using a sockpuppet User:DylanA.Willard-Jones, to continue the disruption, your block is now indefinite. Courcelles 19:00, 27 April 2011 (UTC)