User talk:Ericl

Welcome!

Hello, Ericl, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! TMS63112 22:46, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read this policy regarding verifiability on Wikipedia. I'm going to quote the policy in a nutshell: "Information on Wikipedia must be reliable and verifiable. Facts, viewpoints, theories, and arguments may only be included in articles if they have already been published by reliable sources. Articles should cite these sources whenever possible. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed." I have underlined the last part since it is what pertains to this issue. Your research is not unappreciated, but it is simply your word and has no evidence to back it up. Please add citations per the page I linked to you (this guideline) and your additions are more than welcomed.

Also, be sure they have an appropriate tone for an encyclopedia. I have used the following paragraph that you had added to Calvin Coolidge as an example:

"In 1920 Governor Coolidge ran for president as a favorite son. When Sen.Warren G. Harding got the nomination he asked the delegates to nominate someone else for the second spot, but then something strange happened: The delegates rebelled! Coolidge was nominated after some heated arguments on the floor and he decided to accept."

The first sentence is a claim; there needs to be some sort of reference which says he was a favorite son. The second and third sentences, which describe "something strange" as happening, are not of an appropriate encyclopedic tone, which must remain neutral and even throughout the article.

That is just one example. Please understand that citations are extremely important if Wikipedia is to be a verifiable source of information. As I said earlier, your contributions are welcome, but please realize that truth doesn't matter at Wikipedia; verifiability does. Thanks. --tomf688 (talk - email) 00:32, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add false information to Wikipedia. Walter Scheel never was Chancellor of Germany, not even for a single day. He was Vice-Chancellor and as such Willy Brandt's deputy. Usually a Chancellor remains in office beyond his term until a new Chancellor is elected. Because of Brandt's condition Scheel, as VC, acted in his stead. But still he was not Chancellor. Another point: Helmut Schmidt never was leader of his party. Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 17:36, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ericl: Sorry, but regarding your comment here: [1] I'm not sure what you are talking about. Please provide a link to the diff or article, and I will reply to the content of your comment. WVhybrid 01:08, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you are talking about United States presidential election, 2000, my last edit was on that article was more than a month ago. [2], and as you can see, I didn't delete anything. If you are talking about another article, I don't have a clue about what you are talking about. Sorry. WVhybrid 01:16, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I saw in a couple of your edits, you stated that a given person who was President pro tempore of the Senate at a time when the Vice Presidency was vacant (e.g., David Rice Atchison, Benjamin Wade) was serving as "Acting Vice President" and therefore was next in line to succeed to the Presidency. You are right that each of these people would have succeeded to the Presidency if something had happened to the President. You are also right that as President pro tempore, these people presided over meetings of the Senate, which would normally have been a Vice Presidential responsibility (in those days, unlike today, the Vice President actually did spend a fair amount of time showing up at the Senate and presiding).

However, I wanted to mention that the term "Acting Vice President" is not one that was ever used. Moreover, it's not the fact that the President pro tempore was acting as Vice President that placed him next in line for the Presidency, it's the fact that under the law at that time, the President pro tempore, in that capacity, was next after the Vice President in the presidential line of succession. Under later statutes, when other officials (first the Secretary of State, then the Speaker of the House) were placed next in line after the Vice President, they would come before the President pro tempore even though the President pro tempore continued to perform certain duties that a Vice President would ordinarily perform.

Since you're interested in this topic, you might want to take a look at United States presidential line of succession#History of succession law set by Congress and Presidential Succession Act if you haven't seen them before. Regards, Newyorkbrad 21:34, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Newyorkbrad, is correct. Never in the history of the US Constitution, did a position called 'Acting Vice President' ever exist. GoodDay 23:03, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eric; could you please modify your signature to link to [[User:Ericl|Ericl]] rather than [[Ericl]]? Right now it's trying to point to a redlink in articlespace, which I'm sure wasn't your intent... also, you may want to create a redirect from your userpage to your talk page, if you're not going to put anything there (or like me, you can make your signature link to both). Let me know if you have any trouble working out how to do this... -- nae'blis 16:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Eric; I was going to ask you the same thing. I got your post on my page (which I'll answer just below) and I needed to fix your sig to hop over to this page. Are you signing your name with four tildes (the tilde is the ~ character) rather than typing it manually? In any event, User:Ericl would be your userpage (when you set it up); just "Ericl" would be an article about you in the encyclopedia, which there isn't one (maybe someday :) ). Regards, Newyorkbrad 20:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message about this. I appreciate the information you provided. If you have any sources or documents that use the term "Acting Vice President" in an official context before 1886, could you please let me know what they are. I've done research on related areas and have never seen it used in the U.S. Thanks, Newyorkbrad 20:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This quirk fascinated people of the 17th century, then Schiller, Pushkin, etc. For my part, I'm not so sure that he was an impostor. There is always some chance that he was the real tsarevich. Ivan IV's wife acknowledged him as her son, for instance. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 16:07, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My sincere apologies for blocking you by mistake. Let me know if you are still autoblocked, but it should be removed. Have a nice night. alphachimp. 06:30, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

it hasn't. please unblock me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericl (talk • contribs)

It should be now. alphachimp. 07:14, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your edit summary at the Speaker of the House of Representatives article. Please note that terms of U.S. Congresses end at 12 noon on January 3rd, as indicated in the Twentieth Amendment to the Constitution. Hope this clarifies, let me know if you have any questions. Newyorkbrad 03:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, you are absolutely right about there being a "technical gap" in the terms of Speakers, my only point is about exactly when the gap starts. Newyorkbrad 16:24, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your edit to Acting President of the United States which mentioned that the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate are constitutionally included in the line of succession of the 25th Amendment.

I reverted that change because you are incorrect. While it is true that those officers are mentioned in the 25th amendment, they are mentioned only because those are the officers to whom the President and Vice President/cabinet file written declarations about presidential disability.

The 25th Amendment does NOT specify a line of succession except for Vice President.

The text of the 25th is even included in the article and available online at Cornell Law School for your review. JasonCNJ 19:02, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated 2012 Democratic National Convention for deletion. If you are trying to build a reputation for yourself as a serious contributor, creating articles of this type and tone (Nothing of importance will happen. The speeches will be for the most part forgettable, and heroes of yore, such as former Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton will be trotted out to blow the delegates a kiss or two. The ratings will be very low, even for a convention with no suspense at all.) is probably not the best way to go about it. Please see WP:NOT (particularly the Crystal ball section). A lot of your other contributions look good. Savidan 20:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article is facing a deletion vote. Thought you might like to know. GoodDay 23:21, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain your addition to Western Wall: “The Sassanid Jewish "state" has always been forbidden knowledge”. I am confused! Chesdovi 13:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ericl. I've put back Presidential Succession Act in this article. The 25th Amendment only mentions the Vice President as the offical to succeed to the Presidency or the Presidential powers & duties (Acting President), no other officials are mentioned. GoodDay 18:33, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My point in adding the {{fact}} marker to United States presidential election, 2008 timeline wasn't that it's controversial now. It's that adding the references as you add the material is much easier now than it is down the road after all of the news links dry up. Please cite sources in the article rather than only in the comment in the change history. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to do it. Thanks! -- RobLa 05:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And a request from me on the same subject: thanks for adding the numbers on United States presidential election, 2008 timeline; would you please also add references to where those come from? Thanks. Peterbr 15:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, every time the governor leaves the state or is unable to perform his duties, Richard Codey has been Acting Governor. While I'm sure that you could get an exact count, this has happened likely dozens of times since Codey became Senate President, so this is NOT the Codey's third stint as Acting Governor. On the List of Governors of New Jersey, Acting Governors are listed only if they are serving due to a vacancy, not due to the temporary incapacitation of a sitting governor, as in the current case. Alansohn 18:41, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sofi abu taleb wasn't a president, it was a transitional period after the assassination of Sadat because he was the head of the parliament, and this is what happens at the emergency situations according to the constitution, he wasn't chosen by the people and he wasn't able to do what the president can do.

u know ? it happened again when the current president went for a surgery in Germany and he delegated the prime-minister some authority, but he couldn't assigns a minister or makes a war decision and so on, i live in egypt and i'm sure he wasn't a PRESIDENT and thanx for ur co-op

Realman208

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to George Washington. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. John Jay was Chief Justice. —Adavidb 21:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please be courteous to other editors and use edit summaries when updating articles. The Mathbot tool shows your usage of edit summaries to be extremely low:

Edit summary usage for Ericl: 17% for major edits and 7% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits in the article namespace.

Using edit summaries helps other editors quickly understand your edits, which is especially useful when you make changes to articles that are on others' watchlists. Thanks and happy editing! --Kralizec! (talk) 00:23, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Russ (talk) 14:04, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:CRYSTAL. Yes, all US news outlets are talking about Paterson's likely ascension to governor in the coming hours or days, but it hasn't happened yet, and since Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, Wikipedia can't say that it has happened. I believe the article already says that he is likely to become governor, so I think that is all that is needed. Thanks, and happy wiki-ing! --Jaysweet (talk) 14:47, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you want to create a Sandbox page that has a version of the article where you can "get ready for the big switch," I can help you do that. Please do not edit the actual article to say he is governor, though. --Jaysweet (talk) 14:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your reorg of the sections was not complete. "Stem cell research" under "Governor of NY" is wrong. Why make the page worse just when so many people are reading it? Make your edits correct and complete, it is a live page. Maybe wait a little while. Thanks, it is a team effort. Colfer2 (talk) 14:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, first of all, please do not put messages for me on my user page -- those messages belong on my user talk page. This is a common confusion with new users, so don't worry too much about it. But anyway, I moved your comment to my user talk page.

Secondly, we have to be very careful here. Every US news outlet is reporting that Spitzer's aides have said that he will resign at 11:30AM EST. If you want to put that in the article, that is fine. But it hasn't happened yet, and until it does, Paterson is not governor. The aides could be lying. Spitzer could change his mind. Neither of these things are likely, but again, WP:CRYSTAL is very clear about this.

And even if we take for granted that the aides are correct and that Spitzer will resign at 11:30, Paterson does not become governor until that time, and his Wikipedia article should reflect that.

I hope this makes sense to you. As I said, if you want to start working on a version of the Paterson article that names him as governor, you can do that in Sandbox space (e.g. create a page called User:Ericl/David Paterson that you can edit yourself) and then, when Spitzer announces his resignation, you can copy that page into the actual article.

Until then, do not continue to say that Paterson is governor, because he's not. Not yet. Thanks! --Jaysweet (talk) 15:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And David Paterson will probably become governor effective Monday. Hold your horses! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Colfer2 (talk • contribs) 15:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Ericl, do you have a source for the revote thing you just added to United States presidential election, 2008? I see lots of articles talking about all the hand-wringing about the possibility of revotes, but I haven't seen any breaking news saying they are actually likely to be held on such-and-such a date. I was wondering what you source was for that?

(Incidentally, I am not Wikistalking you, I just happen to have both David Paterson and United States presidential election, 2008 on my Watchlist. I promise! :) ) --Jaysweet (talk) 16:17, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I found a ref for "june 3", and will add it to the articles: http://www.newsweek.com/id/107872 - Colfer2 (talk) 16:24, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so as not to clutter up Ericl's talk page, I am moving the discussion to Talk:United States presidential election, 2008.  :) Thanks Ericl and Colfer2! --Jaysweet (talk) 16:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Ecoleetage (talk) 03:13, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{subst:adw|Unknown ruler of Persia}} Ecoleetage (talk) 03:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As you may or may not be aware, one of our requirements for articles is that they be verified through reliable sources. Unknown ruler of Persia needs sourcing if it is going to remain. It's currently being considered for deletion at AfD; a five day deletion discussion process. I did some preliminary research looking for mention of the unknown ruler and so far haven't found anything. Can you tell me where you got the information to write this article? I can help you cite the source if it's a source we can use. Sourcing the article is what the way to make the article encyclopedic and not be deleted. As the creator, you are best situated to supply a source. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:24, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The party manifesto (apparently you call it a platform) of any and every political party is source material and is not to be published on Wikipedia. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 16:30, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I caught your edits from August 9th replacing the word "Lapp" with the proper word of "Sami". You claimed that it was "political correctness" to use the word "Sami", insted of "lapp" [3]. Had you read the article you would have learned that the word "lapp" was derogatory and stated the reasons why it was. If you had a question, you could have asked it on the discussion page, otherwise what you did would be considered vandalism. Dinkytown (talk) 05:55, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. VG ☎ 17:54, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you are cordially invited to join WikiProject Russia. We are a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to Russia.

As you have shown an interest in Roman Kopin we thought you might like to take an interest in this WikiProject.

We look forward to welcoming you to the project! --Russavia Dialogue Stalk me 22:36, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a shame third party nominees can't participate in the Debates controlled by the Democrats & Republicans. PS- I'll never forget the treatment of Nader in 2000. GoodDay (talk) 15:29, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ref on the Israeli election article, but in future, could you avoid adding just the bare hyperlink, and format it (e.g. <ref>[http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1032930.html Israel sets Feburary 10 as date for general elections] Haaretz, 30 October 2008</ref>). Cheers, пﮟოьεԻ 57 17:03, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In fairness La Garita is beyond doubt the most explosive volcanic eruption known within the last 250 million years but considering 20% of the volume of the siberian traps is known to be ryholite and the fact that the Siberian Traps is one of largest volcanic events in earth's history, we could safely assume that those eruptions were easily the largest explosive eruptions known so far. I give you the benfit of the doubt that La Garita was extrodinarily powerful but at the end of the day the volume still stands as 5000 cubic km meaning it's still a VEI 8 eruption. However if you take a trip to PBS and more specifically NOVA they aired a program called "Mystery of the Megavolcano". On the site for the program is a feature called "Blasts from the past" which list an eruption in africa as having a volume of 1600 cubic miles or 7500 cubic km if you assume that 600 cubic miles = 2500 cubic km. Take a look!! Yours Wiki235 (talk) 18:05, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Nuttah (talk) 21:37, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:16, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you create an inappropriate page, you will be blocked from editing. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:16, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The content was:

Calvin Coolidge was sworn in by his father, john, by the light of a kerosene lamp at approximaely two in the morning of August 2, 1923. All involved went back to bed.

That to me reads like nonsense, or an attempt at humor at the very least. You're free to recreate and elaborate on the fact if it's true (and to provide third-party references), but look at it from the point of view of someone like me who stumbles on something like this.--PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:27, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Huh? I'm not saying anything about that "Krew" nonsense to you. That was a real vandal whom I've blocked. Don't worry. PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then please accept my apologies for assuming the worst and falsely accusing you. I'll restore it right away. PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I see you're one of the creators of those Presidential Inauguration stub articles. You might like to help out by making sure they're also in the proper stub categories. (I've already done some myself, including the FDR articles.) All you have to do is add the following after the regular categories: {{US-politics-stub}} {{US-hist-stub}}. Cgingold (talk) 13:56, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article United States House of Representatives elections in the District of Columbia, 2010, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Wikipedia is not a crytal ball and cannot predict the future

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Passportguy (talk) 13:46, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be marking nearly all of your edits as minor, even though many of them aren't. The policy for minor edits says that they're only for when the edit "could never be the subject of a dispute". For instance, you added content to 2009 New York State Senate leadership crisis, which didn't appear to be completely NPOV, and still marked it minor.

As a general rule, whenever you add any content, it isn't a minor edit. -- Austin512 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ericle: Your recent article about Eve Frank is troubling. The article deals with a highly controversial topic therefore it is doubly important to ensure that it be accurate and factual and state the truth. It is undoubtedly an important subject, but the only WP:CITE you make is to a weirdo site that has no information, only ads. The article also claims that the US judge Felix Frankfurter was descended from her, how did you arrive at this conclusion? You need to back up such serious claims with WP:RS otherwise the article will be ammended and cut down to a stub until reliable sources can be obtained. Thanks for attending to this serious matter ASAP. IZAK (talk) 07:38, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ericl! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 73 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Thomas L. J. D'Alesandro III - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 05:48, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you are working on this or not, but the House might vote this week on impeaching him (see [4]). The articles of impeachment are on Wikisource; see s:Articles of Impeachment Against United States District Court Judge G. Thomas Porteous, Jr. - Thanks, Hoshie 21:50, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. RadioFan (talk) 13:26, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. RadioFan (talk) 13:44, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Second United Kingdom general election 2010. Please use the {{hangon}} template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion, and make your case on the page's talk page. Thank you. Davnor (talk) 13:59, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Timeline for the Labour Party (UK) leadership elections, 2010 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

speculative and unnecessary; a full article may be useful, a timeline will not.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ironholds (talk) 18:23, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

everyone seems to disasgree with you Off2riorob (talk) 17:46, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Our policies on non-free content, specifically our guidelines related to list articles, don't allow the use of non-free images on list and gallery articles. (ESkog)^(Talk) 14:30, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
2. Editors violating the rule will usually be blocked for 24 hours for a first incident.
3. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording, and content 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 edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 16:00, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ericl, I'm being serious. If you were to create a new article on the Turkish revolts it would be a useful contribution to the project. I sense that you are upset that it has been ignored. You can redress that omission. Ericoides (talk) 16:18, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I see what you are saying, but whether you like or not, that is simply how the term "Arab world" is defined: through the official language of a country. We are not here to argue whether or not it is the correct definition, but to reflect what others say. And as far as I know, no one has said that Turkey is part of that world. And, of course, because of the definition of the term, they would be mad to do so, like arguing that a duck should be classified as a fish because it spends time on water. Ericoides (talk) 19:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed one of your edit notes - al-Jazeera was kicked out of Yemen by the government. Flatterworld (talk) 15:02, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Next Israeli legislative election 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. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:49, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Ahmad Obeidat has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the 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 request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Wilbysuffolk Talk to me 15:47, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was all set to template you on WP:V as a new user, but then I saw that you've been editing for years and really ought to know better. Please don't do this again, and especially not at articles on controversial topics. Centrify (talk) (contribs) 15:05, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Kuwaiti parliamentary election, 2012, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.persecution.org/2011/12/06/radical-islamists-dominate-egypts-parliamentary-elections.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 19:31, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited New Hampshire Democratic primary, 2012, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Huntsman (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) 10:47, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--William S. Saturn (talk) 20:06, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make articles about a living person that are entirely negative in tone and unsourced. Wikipedia has a policy of verifiability and any negative information we use must be reliably sourced, and our articles must be balanced. Negative unreferenced biographies of living people are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to 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 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. GILO   A&E⇑ 16:52, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To anyone reading this: The above WAS placed in error. That's what happens when someone is too quick on the drawEricl (talk) 17:19, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ericl,

please note that on Wikipedia there is something called the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. It means that if one of your edits gets reverted, you should please start a discussion on the talk page, instead of re-reverting to your version. Repeated reverting may lead to an edit war, which has to be avoided at any rate. And please do not WP:SHOUT in your edit summaries (as you have done here. Thank you. Regards --RJFF (talk) 23:13, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Wolfe, Jr. 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.--JayJasper (talk) 20:42, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Missouri Republican primary, 2012 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Jon Huntsman

Oklahoma Democratic primary, 2012 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Gadfly

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:29, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Republican Party presidential candidates, 2012, has been proposed for a merge with Republican Party presidential primaries, 2012. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Jack Bornholm (talk) 16:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has pretty strict rules against adding unsourced, negative information on biographies of living persons. That's why I have repeatedly removed your additions to the Karger page, as saying someone "failed" at something is negative, and you provided no sources. Please note that it would not be enough to show that he wasn't on the ballot in various states, as he may not have tried to get on the ballot in some of those states. (I'm also pretty sure that some states ballots are not yet closed.) It may be easier in terms of sourcing to list the states/territories whose ballots he was on. --Nat Gertler (talk) 17:32, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Juan Nepomuceno de Quesada y Barnuevo, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, 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. Andrew Kurish (talk) 15:10, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Juan Nepomuceno de Quesada y Barnuevo requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, 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. Andrew Kurish (talk) 15:11, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Minor barnstar
	For effort above and beyond on the United States presidential election, 2012 timeline. Keep up the good work. Alyas Grey : talk 23:40, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited United States presidential election, 2012, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages John Huntsman, Libertarian Party and Blogger (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) 10:45, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You need to paraphrase in your own style and the new page is definitely not paraphrasing but rather a direct copy of the schedule. I'm sorry but I've reverted back to the old style which was paraphrasing. ViriiK (talk) 00:42, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop reorganizing to your personal preference of how you want to see it. I want to maintain consistency between conventions. Look at the 2008 or 2004 convention as your baseline. ViriiK (talk) 01:59, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Schedule of the 2012 Republican National Convention (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to John Sununu, Scott Walker, William Harris and Bob White

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Ericl. I wasn't familiar with your prior edits. Maybe we could use more of your idea. Give me a diff to your reorganization layout which was reverted.– Sir Lionel, EG^(talk) 05:02, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Schedule of the 2012 Republican National Convention. 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 – 2012 Republican National Convention. 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 2012 Republican National Convention – 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. VolatileChemical (talk) 12:38, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of United States presidential candidates (1789–1852), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Samuel Huntington (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) 11:52, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing you were a part of the recent merge discussion reguarding the page I wanted to let you know that the page was inproperly moved and now things are a mess, there is a move request over at Talk:Puerto Rican statehood movement#Requested move - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:33, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I was wondering if you could help with this article? You created it years ago, and it has several long-standing improvement tags. I'm struggling to improve it. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 18:39, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Before re-adding your bit to henotheism, please read the article's Talk page. The consensus is that the LDS movement is not henotheist. Aside from which, any addition to the effect of "largest in all of" requires good sources: it cannot be added without support. TechBear | Talk | Contributions 13:36, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't mean too.

As you may know, VisualEditor ("Edit ^beta") is currently available on the English Wikipedia only for registered editors who choose to enable it. Since you have made 50 or more edits with VisualEditor this year, I want to make sure that you know that you can enable VisualEditor (if you haven't already done so) by going to your preferences and choosing the item, "MediaWiki:Visualeditor-preference-enable". This will give you the option of using VisualEditor on articles and userpages when you want to, and give you the opportunity to spot changes in the interface and suggest improvements. We value your feedback, whether positive or negative, about using VisualEditor, at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback. Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:24, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Impeachment investigations of United States federal officials, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Roger Williams and Phil Roe (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) 09:01, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You created an article about someone who may be notable but didn't provide any references. So I've moved it to your userspace so you can bring it up to the required standard without worrying about deletion. It's here: User:Ericl/Jeanne Hulit. Deb (talk) 18:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's now stuck to my page and I can't get it off!!!!!!! EEEEEEEEK!Ericl (talk) 18:43, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There you go, little fella! :-) Deb (talk) 21:21, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Isabel Saint Malo has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the 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 seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. G S Palmer (talk) 19:54, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Robert Bacon may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• }}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:35, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to World war may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *the [[30 Years War]] (1618–1648))

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:19, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I mean that you need a source that they are "most obscure" and "second most obscure"? What makes him more obscure than "Unknown", King of Elam c. 821 BC? What makes him more obscure than his various Greco-Bactrian and Indo-Greek contemporaries? Furius (talk) 16:57, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Syrian Civil War, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ISIS (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) 08:49, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Spillover from the Syrian Civil War page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GreyShark (dibra) 20:15, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Could you discuss these changes at talk? They are massive and undiscussed. Capitalismojo (talk) 20:22, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Per you question.:

WP:BRD or BOLD, REVERT, DISCUSS is a standard of practice and methodology commonly used here at wikipedia. It is used in order to avoid edit wars or other friction & strife. It relates to wikipedia's policy on consensus. The idea is that an editor makes a BOLD edit and (if other editors REVERT it), rather than reinserting we take it to talk to DISCUSS. Thus rather than slipping into an edit war, that gets nipped in the bud and consensus can be achieved at the talk page. Capitalismojo (talk) 20:37, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please undo all of your recent edits and wait until a consensus is reached. The titles matter a lot and now we have two articles forking each other: Timeline of the Wars of the Arab Winter: ISIS and Timeline of the Wars of the Arab Winter: Iraq. Plus, these are book titles, not Wikipedia titles and are very likely original research. Thanks, Fitzcarmalan (talk) 20:29, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Casualties of the Syrian Civil War spillover in Lebanon page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Timeline of violent events relating to the Syrian Civil War spillover in Lebanon, 2011-14, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Al-Qusayr and Arab Democratic Party. 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) 09:02, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited War on Terror, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ISIL. 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) 09:20, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've closed the discussion. Do you want me to help perform the WP:SPLIT?~Technophant (talk) 04:34, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eric. You have made some changes resulting in this article [5]. Why did you change the name? and what does al-Shams mean?

In any case, please fix it. Worldedixor (talk) 19:57, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What you said on my talk page is wrong. "Al Shams" is not Arabic for "The Levant. Worldedixor (talk) 23:46, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I started a discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Worldedixor to help address problems with this user. Please feel free to add your own issues in the appropriate sections, endorse, or add comments on the talk page.~Technophant (talk) 18:42, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I said this before. We write per what the sources say. First, none of the sources are calling it an invasion by ISIS from Syria as you put it. ISIS was already there in Iraq long before the war in Syria started. Second, the source you left on my talk page also calls those opposing the Iraqi government insurgents. Seems you missed that part. Third, a blog? Wikipedia has rules on blogs to be used as sources. Also, I remind you once again on WP: Common name. And the common name per MOST sources is still insurgency, not regional war, regardless of your personal opinion (POV) for which Wikipedia also has a rule. I may seem harsh on this issue but I'm sorry, I'm simply sticking to WP procedure. Regards! EkoGraf (talk) 10:22, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

List of United States Progressive Party presidential tickets

added links pointing to Progressive Party (United States) and Thomas Marshall

Timeline of the Syrian Civil War (August 2014–present)

added a link pointing to Islamic court

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently edited is the subject of discussion, if you would like to participate: [6]. DocumentError (talk) 03:18, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind adding an "oppose" prior to your opinion statement here? Experience has found these articles need to have editor opinions laid out very clearly in bullet-points to avoid misunderstandings like non-consensus page moves and merges. DocumentError (talk) 22:34, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Eric,

Today, I removed and rewrote text you had contributed on the PKK (2014 action against Islamic State...) and on Turkish involvement in the 2014 military intervention against ISIS (Blowback and the Siege of Kobane).

Your edits (e.g., this diff on the first article and this diff on the second article) were clearly non-neutral in tone and in terms of the representation of some of the information in the source articles.

Please take more care in the future when editing on this topic. AdamColligan (talk) 16:34, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A quick apology - I've just noticed I've removed most of your recent edits to List of Constellation missions while tidying that page up, without realising it! The Constellation list is for the proposed flights of the (cancelled) Constellation program; the recent Orion mission doesn't really have a named program to belong to, it seems, but the recent & future flights are covered at Orion (spacecraft). I've flagged this gap up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spaceflight.

Apologies again if the removal seemed rude - I hadn't realised you'd only added it the day before! Andrew Gray (talk) 21:07, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the List of Constellation missions page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:32, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Supervolcano, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Columbia. 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) 09:16, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As an Irishman and someone who loves traditional Jewish baking, I'm very interested in hearing about these so-called government sponsored anti-Semitic incidents in the Republic of Ireland. CivisHibernius (talk) 05:36, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Right so all you can offer is a Martyn Turner cartoon which highlights the disproportionate response on the part of the Israeli military, a statement from a Labour Party Minister (a man I personally do not like) showing their support for a two state solution by funding Palestinian Institutions and a member of the NI Assembly who wants the current Israeli ambassador removed. The current ambassador compared Free Palestine activists to Hitler and hilariously photoshopped an image of teditinghe Molly Malone statue in Dublin, showing her covered with a Muslim veil along with the words, "Israel now, Dublin next." I won't mention some of the rumours about why he was moved here. The only time the word "Jew" was mentioned was in that appalling CiF watch article, which is proof that some people really do need a proper hobby. In the other two articles nothing was stated which could be considered anti-Semitic. I've reverted your edits. Seriously think before you post. And don't you dare call me an anti-Semite. CivisHibernius (talk) 15:46, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many apologies for reverting your edit. It was unintended and I had thought that I had undone my own edit but clearly not so. All down to editing on a small screen with fat fingerso.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   01:10, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

1912 Progressive National Convention

added a link pointing to Military power

1924 Progressive National Convention

added a link pointing to John Hopkins

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Per the deletion discussion, I started a discussion on the talk page to move the article to "involvement." Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 22:36, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ericl,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Khaled al-Obaidi for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

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. JAEVI (talk) 19:01, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Theodore Roosevelt Digital Library, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.theodorerooseveltcenter.org/Research/Digital-Library.aspx.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:00, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

1924 Progressive National Convention

added a link pointing to William Mahoney

1948 Progressive National Convention

added a link pointing to Municipal Auditorium

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with the copyright bot notwithstanding (please do make sure those are addressed), it seems to me that approaching the TR Digital Library would be best handled as a subsection of a piece on Theodore Roosevelt Center at Dickinson University, which is the sponsoring entity and curator of the website. I also note that the piece does need a proper lead written for it. Would you consider doing an expansion of the piece along these lines?

In an absolutely unrelated matter, I think your recent edits to Conference for Progressive Political Action may be problematic. I do not think that the first conference of the CPPA was a nominating convention for LaFollette, as you intimate with your changes. I will try to revisit this one myself shortly; it's in my wheelhouse historically but I don't recall off the top of my head. I haven't yet reverted your edit, but I do think it is wrong, pending cracking a couple books...

Sorry if this sounds like some grouchy old dude dumping on you; that is not my intent. Thanks for your good work! —Tim Davenport, Corvallis, OR /// Carrite (talk) 15:44, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eric— Yeah, I just looked at your piece on the 1924 LaFollette convention and saw that was the book you cited. I think, but am not sure, that these were two distinct conventions, perhaps with one adjourning and the other starting in the same city at the same locale. That's in my mind anyway. I might have an hour here this morning to spend on the question after I walk the dog and eat something. Not sure that I'll get to the TR Digital Library matter but will see how that goes. That's a really good "find" of a piece that needed coverage by you, excellent job on that! A couple fine points. You can mark things as a stub with two curly brackets, the word stub, and two closing curly brackets: { { stub } } (with no spaces). Also, be sure to write a short summary lead and then set it apart from the body of the article with a header saying "History" or "Biography" or something and then start writing the article again for real there, repeating the lead material fully. The new mobile version of WP just feeds people the lead section, so those should be short, snappy summaries of the full articles, unless things are just a line or two long stubs. Your stuff is actually closer to a starter article in nature than a stub, I think. And it is four tildes to fully sign a post, not three. Hope this helps. Best regards, —Tim /// 15:58, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Ha ha, I just did the three tilde signature myself! Carrite (talk) 16:05, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, that's interesting. It turns out that the problem lies with your article 1924 Progressive National Convention — there was no such thing, it seems, only the first convention of the CPPA, which effectively nominated LaFollette. In other words, there weren't two conventions, there was only one — Cleveland, July 4-5, 1925 — which was detailed previously on the CPPA page (which I have restored). Here is how it went down, per The American Labor Year Book, 1925. (NY: Rand School of Social Science, 1925); pp. 123-124:

"Robert M. LaFollette, Jr. read to the Convention the message of his father. The National Committee [of the CPPA] had requested Senator LaFollette to make the race for the presidency. His acceptance speech declared that the time had come "for a militant political movement independent of the two old party organizations." But he was unwilling to lead any campaign which would hurt those progressives, nominally elected as Republicans and Democrats. Hence he emphasized what he considered the necessity of an independent movement, with candidates only for President and Vice-President, and not the formation of a party nationally, state, and locally, at that time. [Emphasis mine, t.d.] He declared that the paramount issue of the 1924 campaign was "to break the combined power of the private monopoly system over the political and economic life of the American people." A new party, in which all progressives might unite, would be born, he said, after the November elections, for the people "will register their will and united purpose by a vote of such magnitude that a new political party will be inevitable."

So, there was no "Progressive Party National Convention" at all. Your page should probably be changed into a redirect to Conference for Progressive Political Action#First Convention, but I will leave that for you to do as article creator. I'm sure some detail can be migrated over from the source you cite, although the count of 1200 delegates you mention (which is what threw me in the first place) is certainly inflated, the actual delegate count was 600-ish. Best regards, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 17:52, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking this over, if you wanted to make an expanded "main page" about the LaFollette nomination, a simple name change of your new page to 1924 nomination of Robert M. LaFollette for President or some such might work well. The one thing that should not happen is to keep the current title, however, since "Progressive Party" was a ballot line convenience to the LaFollette/Wheeler campaign in 1924, not a "real" party nor an entity which held a "nominating convention." The CPPA held a convention, which nominated LaFollette, if you follow... —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 17:57, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Abdulaziz al-Tuwaijri, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Baath. 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) 09:15, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Council of Political and Security Affairs (Saudi Arabia) 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 read more about 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 "Click here to 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 deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. smileguy91^{Need to talk?} 16:41, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not use your own views as the headings or content. Such insertions are reverted, FYI. --Egeymi (talk) 20:01, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

'Abd al-Ilah

added a link pointing to None

Council of Political and Security Affairs (Saudi Arabia)

added a link pointing to Saud bin Faisal

Supreme Economic Council of Saudi Arabia

added a link pointing to Saud bin Faisal

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Arab Winter page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Arab_Winter#Arenas_section where this was discussed. If you want to challenge that consensus, you will need to provide reasoning and establish new consensus. - Cwobeel (talk) 00:50, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Anelytropsis papillosus, Ericl!

Wikipedia editor Animalparty just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

I've redirected Anelytropsis papillosus to Anelytropsis, per WP:MONOTYPICFAUNA. Note also that Wikispecies templates and formatting conventions don't always work on Wikipedia pages.

To reply, leave a comment on Animalparty's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1864 National Union National Convention, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daniel Dickinson. 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) 09:02, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article Musaad bin Mohammed Al Aiban has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the 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 seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Lakun.patra (talk) 13:28, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on 1860 Whig National Convention requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 "Click here to 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 deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Gronk Oz (talk) 16:53, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of United States National Democratic/Whig Party presidential tickets, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Dallas. 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) 09:46, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is it so difficult just to insert the events as they are without giving any personal and subjective comments. It is an enecyclopedia, and it should be free of our, humble editors', comments. --Egeymi (talk) 13:59, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What about giving full references instead of bare urls? Some of the refs you put are highly unreliable. --Egeymi (talk) 14:07, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Timeline of the 2015 Canadian Federal Election page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:35, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure that other two consuls didn't (formally) stayed in office until 18 May 1804? As far as I know, that was the case. The Constitution of the Year X proclaimed Napoleon to be First Consul for Life, but it didn't relieved the other two of their position... --Sundostund (talk) 14:24, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited United States presidential primary, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert La Follette. 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) 22:18, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's usually spelled (with italics) Dramatis personae or Dramatis personæ. I'm not sure that that such a term should be used as encyclopedic for historical events, though. It's a theatre or performing art term, and usually when used in other contexts, the term is ironic. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 06:03, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Boycotts of Israel. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:44, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Palestine Solidarity Campaign, you may be blocked from editing. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 05:01, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at 2015 Ramadan attacks. RichardOSmith (talk) 19:33, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Summer 2015 Invasion of Syria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Justice and Development Party. 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) 08:54, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your editing of this article is becoming disruptive.

1. Do not remove "citation needed" tags unless you have provided a citation that supports the statement being questioned.
2. Make sure that the reference you provide does actually support the statement -- you will see where I have commented out material that you have added that is not supported by the reference you've provided. For example, using aa reference that says that a street vendor was killed to support a statement about "innocent people dying" undermines your credibility here. It shows that other editors should check your references because you cannot be trusted to report correctly what they say.

If you continue editing in this way, you may find yourself blocked from editing. Ground Zero | t 16:51, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may notice that I've been curating this article since I created it three weeks ago. BTW, how is an article about an innocent person in Jordan being killed by a Syrian mortar shell disprove that innocent people in Jordan have been killed by errant Syrian mortar shells?Ericl (talk) 17:26, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You miss the point of providing reference. You wrote that innocent people had died, and provided a reference that said one person had died. in order words, you did not provide that more than one had died. It looks like you are misrepresenting what the reference wrote. I think it is sloppiness on your part, rather than any intent to deceive, but either way, it tells other editors that your edits are suspect. Ground Zero | t 17:54, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

<3

Kyle (talk) 22:41, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Summer 2015 Invasion of Syria 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. bender235 (talk) 15:42, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sunday August 2, 1-7pm: WikNYC Picnic

You are invited to join us the "picnic anyone can edit" in Brooklyn's Prospect Park, as part of the Great American Wiknic celebrations being held across the USA. Remember it's a wiki-picnic, which means potluck. Sunday August 2 WikNYC Picnic (RSVP) (also on meetup.com) 1pm–7pm - come by any time! @ Bartel-Pritchard Square entrance (Prospect Park West and 15th St), immediately on the lawn to your left as you walk through the lovely lotus columns. Subway: ​ to 15th Street – Prospect Park (IND Culver Line) We hope to see you there! --Pharos (talk) 03:31, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply] (Bonus event: WikiWednesday Salon @ Babycastles - Wednedsay, August 19)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Timeline of the Syrian Civil War (August 2015–present), is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

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 "Click here to 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. OluwaCurtis The King : talk to me 14:44, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for an apparent inability or unwillingness to comply with basic content policies despite years of experience and dozens of previous issues. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Beeblebrox (talk) 18:18, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ericl (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

I honestly don't know why I was blocked. I never made any disruptive edits, even though some have claimed I have. The articles on the expansion of the Syrian Civil War in Turkey was not the least bit disruptive. There was a major bruhaha in the media and it deserved an article. Later, the shooting actually started. The references were all good. Major newssites from several major countries, including such ones at the here in the 'States. As to Spillover of the Syrian Civil War, for most of the time I seemed to be only one following it. If you look at my recent clean-up of the article, it is smart, efficient, and to the point. the article is more of an index to the subject. The War has been going on for years and every now and then it starts sploshes over to one of it's neighbors, which is extremely annoying. What I did was not disruptive. My comments at the time may not have been very nice (I didn't mention any names), but the work I did on the edits were necessary and proper.

On occasion, I may be brusque, as I was in the 2015 Canadian Election, but think about it. All previous Canadian elections have standardized titles, and the reason that this one does not is because some believe that somehow the election could possibly be delayed by the Harper government past the legal mandated date of October 2015. My changing the title when it appeared that an immediate dissolution would mean it would be in 2015 and not in 2014...what precisely was wrong with that? The current Fixed date election law could not be repealed without the equivilent of declaration of war or a zombie attack (the latter was a bit over the top, I admit), but under normal circumstances, the federal election will indeed take place this year. There were some problems about the 2012 election, which was the last time I "got into trouble", but if you go way back then, you will notice that I was in fact right, and the people I was trying to get removed (candidates, not editors), never got more than 52 votes the entire primary season and didn't deserve to get placed with those people who got not only hundreds of thousands of votes, but delegates as well...if you look at message 61, for example, which asked for speedy deletion of an article about a guy named John Wolfe, Jr. I won that one. The guy came in second for the Democratic Nomination last time out, and got over a hundred thousand votes. Is insisting that he is notable, or Bob Rogers, who was the Democratic nominee for US Senator from Oklahoma, somehow disruptive? Their articles are still up there.

The problem, as I see it, is that I'm slightly ahead of the curve when it comes to the current and recent unpleasentness in the middle east. I insisted that the War with ISIS was in fact part of the same war, and I was right. Over the past NINE years, I have done a great deal of good on Wikipedia and have spent vast amounts of effort and time to create and maintain the best of the site. Look at what I've done for US presidential elections. I don't deserve to be blocked, please put be back where I belongEricl (talk) 22:17, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I agree with Beeblebrox that there are severe WP:OR issues with your editing that you seem unable to recognize. And that explicitly includes your edits on US elections. Huon (talk) 23:55, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

• You see, being "ahead of the curve" actually means you are making things up based on your own observations and writing them down here as if they were fact. Whether your observations turn out to be right or wrong is irrelevant, Wikipedia explicitly does not allow us to base article content on our own observations. That you have been editing for so long and seem not to to understand or care about such a basic concept of how this works is exactly why I blocked you. Look at this page. people have been trying to explain this to you for nine years. if you don't get it by now I don't know that you ever will, but that's up to you. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:08, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No it doesn't, and they haven't. Had they actually been doing that, I'd have been blocked ages ago. The "observations," such as noticing that Iraq has a new Foreign Minister, are what the cold hard facts that I've been reading, which is what everyone else does, and and I've always used references. Pleaae put me back on. Ericl (talk) 23:44, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I enjoyed your comment that the fixed election date law could not be repealed without the equivalent of a declaration of war or a zombie attack. In fact, the fixed election date law could be repealed by Parliament for whatever reason it decided to be appropriate. Declaration of war or zombie attack is entirely speculation. And you don't seem to get that, or be able to provide a reliable source to support your argument. User:Ground Zero

When writing about a future SCHEDULED event, such as this year's Canadian Election, one has to make the assumption that everything will go as normal. It has to be assumed that there will NOT be a declaration of war or a zombie invasion or a terrorist attack that would upend the system. If there is a consensus in the "real world" that something must happen by a certain date, then Wikipedia must reflect that. The Democratic National committee is within it's rights to cancel next year's convention and declare Hillary to be the nominee if it wants. Will it? NO!!!!!! The disruption that a gratuitous repeal of the fixed election act by Parliament months or weeks before a scheduled dissolution would have been enormous. There is a reasonableness test that must be applied, and barring the zombies, delaying the election into 2016 or later fails.Ericl (talk) 13:55, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your response validates the indefinite block, in my opinion. Ground Zero | t 14:49, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Ericl (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log) • SI)

---

Request reason:

You need me. I have been a productive wikipedian for nine years. I have organized and created hundreds of articles and almost none have been deleted. I have mentioned my hard work on US presidential elections, one person said it smacks of “original research “ but that could not be farther from the case. Major newspapers like the New York Times or the Chicago Tribune are NOT considered “primary sources. “ They are easily accessible behind pay walls. The same with “Facts on File’s” database on presidential elections, which is available in many libraries in book form. Photocopying and reformatting numbers (the physical who-got-what-votes tally at the Conventions are NOT copyrighted) is NOT original research, as would going to a presidential library and reading FDR’s letters. I have done work on pretty much every single article on Presidential elections since I arrived here in 2005, and much of my additions and editing is still there. The same as for Presidents and Vice-Presidents of the US, as with the lists for [[Chief Ministers of England]|] and quite a few of Kings and Queens of quite a few countries. Look at what I did for the Succession in Saudi Arabia, for example. When I first got there a couple of years ago it was a complete mess. The articles on the statuatory governing councils were less than bare bones and when King Salmon first took power and cleaned house, there was even an attempt to remove an article I had just put up on the new order of things. These things happen when you have to go to the bathroom and one saves something briefly. A similar thing happened when I was reviving from the dead the article 1860 Constitutional Union Convention and had already added some references. What’s the deal with that? Lesser high officials in foreign countries are notable. Members of the Saudi Cabinet, for example, Khaled al-Tuwaijri, chief for the Saudi Court, was the most powerful non-royal in the Saudi Government. He didn’t have an article until I discovered him just after his ouster in February. My improvements on the article on Prince [Muhammed bin Salman]] were reverted, but that was for political reasons. Someone had decided that the fact he had just been given vast powers and grand titles (he has since become Deputy Crown Prince) should be kept secret. I am quite proud of most of what I have done at Wikipedia, and it would be wrong of you to ban me for all my good works. I have never vandalized anything, and I have been a loyal member of the cause. I have never been deliberately disruptive and have always acted for the good of the community. Please let me back. Ericl (talk) 18:25, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Since 2006 you have received a horrifying number of messages about problems with your editing, but you arrogantly ignore them, and continue in the same way. It is astonishing that you have not been blocked many times over the years, but now that a block has come, it might be hoped that it would prompt you to at last start taking notice of other editors' concerns. On the contrary: every time you have posted here since the block, you have added yet more confirmation that you totally fail to see what the concerns are (or refuse to: but it makes no difference), and that you have no intention whatever of changing. The arrogance that you show in your unblock requests is amazing: did you really think that was the way to persuade an administrator that from now on you will start editing more collaboratively? The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:53, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

"I have never vandalized anything.... I have never been deliberately disruptive...." So I suppose your account was hacked when it made this edit? — MShabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 18:47, 26 July 2015 (UTC) Then what is it a map of?Ericl (talk) 20:27, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wednesday August 19, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan. We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities. After the main meeting, pizza and refreshments and video games in the gallery! Wednesday August 19 WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC (RSVP on-wiki or at meetup.com). 7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street Featuring a keynote talk this month to be determined! We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 15:58, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Wednesday September 16, 7pm: WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC

You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our evening "WikiWednesday" salon and knowledge-sharing workshop by 14th Street / Union Square in Manhattan. This month, we will also host a Newcomer's Wiki Workshop for those getting started on the encyclopedia project! We hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming editathons, and other outreach activities. After the main meeting, pizza/chicken/vegetables and refreshments and video games in the gallery! Wednesday September 16 WikiWednesday Salon and Skill-Share NYC (RSVP on-wiki or at meetup.com). 7:00pm - 9:00 pm at Babycastles, 137 West 14th Street Featuring a keynote talk this month to be determined! We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 15:11, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply] Bonus events, RSVP now for our latest upcoming editathons: September 20 - Afrocrowd Wikipedia editathon @ Queens Library October 3 - WikiArte Latin America editathon @ MoMA October 15 - Women in Architecture editathon @ Guggenheim

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Saturday October 3: WikiArte Latin America Edit-a-thon @ MoMA

You are invited to join us for a full Saturday (drop-in any time!) of social Wikipedia editing at the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) for our upcoming "WikiArte" Latin America Edit-a-thon, for Wiki Arte y Cultura Latinoamericana, a communal day of creating, updating, improving, and translating Wikipedia articles about Latin American art and culture. Saturday October 3 WikiArte Edit-a-thon @ MoMA (RSVP on-wiki or at meetup.com). 11:00am - 5:00 pm (drop-in anytime!) at MoMA Cullman Education and Research Building, 4 West 54th Street All are invited, with no specialized knowledge of the subject or Wikipedia editing experience required. We will provide training sessions and resources for beginner Wikipedians, WiFi, reference materials, and suggested topics, as well as childcare and refreshments. Please bring your laptop, power cord, and ideas for articles that need to be updated, translated, or created. You are welcome to edit all day or drop by to show your support, and to follow #WikiArte on social media! Trainings for new and less experienced Wikipedia editors will be offered (in English) at 11:30 a.m., 1:30 p.m., and 3:30 p.m. Tutorials and resources in Spanish will be available online, and participants are also encouraged to work on the Spanish and Portuguese language editions of Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 10:33, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply] P.S. Next event, October 15 - Women in Architecture editathon @ Guggenheim

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Thursday October 15: Women in Architecture Edit-a-thon @ Guggenheim

You are invited to join us for a full afternoon and evening of social Wikipedia editing at the Guggenheim (drop-in any time, noon-8pm!), during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles covering the lives and works of women in architecture. Saturday October 15 Women in Architecture Edit-a-thon @ Guggenheim (RSVP on-wiki or at meetup.com). noon - 8pm (drop-in anytime!) at Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, Garrett Lobby @ 1071 5th Ave by E 88 St In conjunction with Archtober and New York Archives Week, the Guggenheim will host its third Wikipedia edit-a-thon—or, #guggathon— to enhance articles related to women in architecture on Wikipedia. The Guggenheim aims to further the goals of Ada Lovelace Day for STEM, and Art+Feminism for art, in a field that, by its nature combines both. The Guggenheim will work alongside ArchiteXX, the founders of WikiD: Women Wikipedia Design #wikiD, the international education and advocacy program working to increase the number of Wikipedia articles on women in architecture and the built environment. New and experienced editors are welcome. Can’t join us in New York? Visit our global partnerships page to discover an edit-a-thon in a city near you or simply join remotely. We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 19:34, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Thursday October 15: Women in Architecture Edit-a-thon @ Guggenheim

You are invited to join us for a full day and evening of social Wikipedia editing at the Guggenheim (drop-in any time, noon-8pm!), during which we will create, update, and improve Wikipedia articles covering the lives and works of women in architecture. Thursday, October 15 Women in Architecture Edit-a-thon @ Guggenheim (RSVP on-wiki or at meetup.com). noon - 8pm (drop-in anytime!) at Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, Garrett Lobby @ 1071 5th Ave by E 88 St In conjunction with Archtober and New York Archives Week, the Guggenheim will host its third Wikipedia edit-a-thon—or, #guggathon—to enhance articles related to women in architecture on Wikipedia. The Guggenheim aims to further the goals of Ada Lovelace Day for STEM, and Art+Feminism for art, in a field that, by its nature combines both. The Guggenheim will work alongside ArchiteXX, the founders of WikiD: Women Wikipedia Design #wikiD, the international education and advocacy program working to increase the number of Wikipedia articles on women in architecture and the built environment. New and experienced editors are welcome. Can’t join us in New York? Visit our global partnerships page to discover an edit-a-thon in a city near you or simply join remotely. We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 19:58, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people to hold U.S. Cabinet Secretaryships for ten years or more 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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:14, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Israeli involvement in the Syrian Civil War 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. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:41, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 1860 Whig National Convention. Since you had some involvement with the 1860 Whig National Convention redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 01:26, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Rogers (Oklahoma politician) 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. Bearcat (talk) 17:41, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]