User talk:Jlambert

I couldn't decide between this one and the good humor one, but I liked this one better.

		The Socratic Barnstar
		"Again none of the links you posted above can be considered reliable. They point to an self-published open wiki by anonymous authors. There also seems to be an enormous amount of contention as to what they mean as evidenced by the last delete discussion. And "not having a whiff of common sense" is just an observation of a disability, not necessarily a personal attack." - That's just too clever. Kallimina (talk) 04:48, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not return content to articles that does not meet our guidelines as you did to MUSH. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.69.139.142 (talk) 14:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please use the articles discussion page. Jlambert (talk) 15:08, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to MUSH. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.207.69.140.37 (talk) 15:43, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to MUSH, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you.

• Hello, there is a book article being proposed for deletion, the book was written by the same author of another controversial book, that Wikipedia article about that book was also proposed for deletion, you were part of the discussion of the previous book so I thought you might want to be involved in this discussion, here's the link to book's article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_Make_the_Black_Kids_Angry

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]