User talk:Zzz111zzz

Welcome!

Hello, Zzz111zzz, 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 God 21 Project, 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!  Acroterion  (talk)  04:44, 25 December 2010 (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

Speedy deletion nomination of God 21 Project


A tag has been placed on God 21 Project 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 an organization or company, 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.  Acroterion  (talk)  04:44, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Zorek Richards


A tag has been placed on Zorek Richards 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.  Acroterion  (talk)  04:45, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Zorek Richards for deletion
The article Zorek Richards is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Zorek Richards 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. RL0919 (talk) 06:03, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Moved to a more appropriate location
Sorry to be blunt but a work in progress is not a valid response to a CSD request. It is perfectly understandable that it takes some time to pull an article together, but if the first posting to main space will not meet the minimum requirements, you should start the article in a user subpage.

I've taken the liberty of moving the page to a user subpage.

You can find it here: User:Zzz111zzzGod21 Project

You can work on the article at your own pace, then move it into main space (or ask me to move it if you ar not yet able to.) If this does not work for you, let me know and I'll delete it.-- SPhilbrick  T  13:29, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

June 2011
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Michelle Obama. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Loonymonkey (talk) 15:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Please stop adding unreferenced controversial biographical content to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Michelle Obama. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Loonymonkey (talk) 15:30, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Michelle Obama. 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. Further, note that Obama-related articles are under special probation where even 3:RR may not apply. Loonymonkey (talk) 15:42, 3 June 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.

What would be the purpose of editing be if I thought I was wrong? You have not added ANY verifiable evidence to suggest your comments about her are RIGHT. The links are to liberal publications and are NOT neutral.
 * ,,, and Bob's your uncle. OhNo itsJamie Talk 19:36, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. 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. Kubigula (talk) 22:46, 3 June 2011 (UTC) 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.