User talk:TheLetterM

Welcome!

Hello, TheLetterM, 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!  Kingturtle 21:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell. The article "putnam porn" I posted years ago which was in no way an attack site was marked as an attack site by none other than TheLetterM. The page did NOT qualify as an attack site as it did not even mention or poke at the identity of the persons in the video, nor did it portray them in a negative way. I am angry that I was given a warning for "attacking" someone. It merely documents an extremely notable event that happened in UC Berkeley, that is still widely known today.

Hi there, I noticed you reverted my edit of the Tacoma Dome. On the Tacoma Dome's website it quite clearly states that it isn't a Geodesic dome, but that it is the second largest wooden dome. As well, the American Pavillion at Expo 67 is the seventh largest dome, don't remove it.Abebenjoe 17:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've also written the Tacoma Dome folks to have them explain what a "planer radian roof" is as aoppsed to a Geodesic dome. From the picture that is on the wikipedia site, it looks like a Geodesic dome. Abebenjoe 17:47, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey uh no... Why would you revert a fact? I remember the article, because its from The Ballad of Big Nothing, a biography on the life of Elliott Smith, so whoever wrote the quote was partially right. Thank you for experimenting though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.170.154.167 (talk) 07:47, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, have have removed your block request from WP:AIV. I know vandalism, especially vandalism to one's user page, can be frustrating. But please try to remember that blocks are meant to prevent vandalism not punish it. In the future, please make sure that the vandal is active before posting to AIV. Sock puppets, are another issue and should be reported to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets. Keep up the vandal fighting effort. --Selket ^Talk 06:14, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stop change the post-hardore articel and leave me alone!Minutes to Rise

STOP

STOP TO CHANGE EVERYTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Minutes to Rise

GO AWAY

LEAVE ME ALONE; GO AWAY; DON'T BOTHER ME OR JUST BLOCK YOURSELF! Minutes to Rise

My personal thoughts
"A poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing..." -William Shakespeare, Macbeth

Note to reviewing administrator: TLM was blocked for reverting a troll who turned out to be yet another sock of a long-term sockpuppeteer, see Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Minutes to Rise. SalaSkan 21:03, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TheLetterM, I have blocked you for 24 hours for edit warring on Post-hardcore. I realize you believe there is sockpuppetry involved, but first of all, I don't see a clear proof of it, only suspicion. Second, even if you were 100% correct on the sockpuppetry, that wouldn't allow you to violate 3RR, unless you could show it was a banned user, or there was a copy-vio or BLP issue (which I don't see in this case). So please do not edit war - pursue WP:RCU or WP:SSP, and report WP:3RR if you get a positive result and a clear violation. Please read up on the relevant policies during your time out, and feel free to message me if you have any questions or comments. Thanks, Crum375 19:01, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Thank you, I will see about e-mailing you with the sockpuppetry evidence. TheLetterM 19:04, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Crum, please check your email account, I have just sent you evidence of sockpuppetry. TheLetterM 19:39, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whaat!? Did someone just block this editor for revert warring with a troll? User:Minutes to Rise and his socks are single-purpose accounts intended to provoke edit wars, see here. Blocking someone who counters his disruption is insane. SalaSkan 20:24, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, indeed, I have been blocked by Crum375 for editwarring with Minutes to Rise. Regardless, I stand by his decision, as I should've stopped reverting his edits the minute he reached the 3RR limit. I've e-mailed Crum evidence that MtR is a sockpuppeteer and a sockpuppet for User:AFI-PUNK, he has graciously added the specific info on their SSP page. Let's not get carried away, I'll be back tomorrow. TheLetterM 20:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then the block was an obvious mistake. Editors shouldn't be blocked for reverting trolls/sockpuppeteers. 3RR even says so. SalaSkan 20:56, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I checked in with Uncyclopedia, they said that it was alright to keep the material here as long as proper credit is given, which I have already done. [3] KJS77 05:31, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is being claimed that Ian Mackaye was pronounced dead this morning at a Baltimore hospital. The singer of Minor Threat and Fugazi was struck by a car after a show in New Jersey. The driver fled the scene which led to a police investigation that is still going on. Ian Mackaye has been pretty influential in the underground music scene. He will be missed if he is in fact dead. I say "if" because the news isn't really confirmed by a valid source yet. But it is stirring around buzz on the internet. So there is a big possibility that Ian Mackaye is dead.

Could you please take another look at the earlier versons? The section was originally sourced, as seen here, then removed, and re-added without the sources. I will admit I am unfamiliar with the article, but would appreciate you taking a look at it to see if the information is valid. Also, I would just kindly request that when you revert established editors, you not use the "Vandalism" function of Twinkle, as my edits were done during recent changes seeing an anonymous editor blank a large portion of a featured article, and obviously not vandalism. Instead, if you use the simple "Rollback AGF" option, or the "Rollback" option and provide an edit summary, it would be helpful. Thanks so much for letting me know! Ariel♥Gold 01:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you so much for looking at that last revision! I really appreciate it, as I wouldn't know if it was true or not ;) Thanks! Ariel♥Gold 02:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Bottomless Pit (band) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.

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. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 05:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I've moved Vitreous Humor (band), which you created, to Vitreous Humor, as there aren't any other article subjects with the same capitalization. We try to use the most general title possible for articles. On a related note, I changed vitreous humor into a redirect to vitreous humour. All the incoming links to vitreous humor were for the part of the eye; the disambiguation guideline specifies that when one usage of the term is overwhelming, we usually make that one the subject of the main article, and link to articles on other usages from a separate disambiguation page. That guideline page has some examples. I also added some hatnotes to link between vitreous humour and Vitreous Humor, which makes it easy for readers to navigate between the two. No offense meant at all, just tidying up things. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to post on my talk page. Happy editing! —Slowking Man (talk) 05:36, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, Louie-p was not eligible for speedy deletion under criterion G4, because there had been no prior discussion (AfD) on deletion of the article. However, it was still eligible for deletion under A7, as the article did not make any new assertions of notability. —C.Fred (talk) 01:09, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And yes, I know all too well the feeling of hitting 'Save page' and then going, "No, wait, that's not what I meant." It's almost always with templates like that that I use frequently (and I don't use Twinkle, etc.). —C.Fred (talk) 01:15, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated the original chigriki article to be deleted, let's keep this one since it has the correct title.User5802 (talk) 08:37, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please assist me in getting this published

An article that you have been involved in editing, Dick Wertheim, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dick Wertheim. Thank you. Grutness...wha? 04:59, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You placed a CSD tag on Patrick Goodpaster. The article doesn't quite meet A7 - it does indicate why its subject is significant - so I recommend that you list it on AfD if you still think it should be deleted. Graymornings_(talk) 06:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After you proposed speedy deletion of Poisson hidden Markov model, an admin did irresponsibly delete it, and it was by accident that I learned of this and restored that page.

You should not propose speedy deletion of an article merely because it's fairly clumsily written by a newbie. 15 seconds with Google, or even searching within Wikipedia, would have been enough to make clear that the article did not fail to identify its subject. The fact that you are ignorant of mathematics and therefore don't understand an article about it is not a reason for speedy deletion. Michael Hardy (talk) 01:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I saw the message you left on my talk page. If you could have noticed that the article was created about 30 seconds before you proposed deletion, maybe I would have a bit of time to actually write it! Thanks! -|->TheFSaviator-|-> (talk) 20:33, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cisrudlow (talk) 08:10, 3 February 2009 (UTC)cisrudlow Hello, Where have You found information that Hope is not-notable? I know that this band works for SP Records label.[reply]

... with the article Kim McKay. I'm not sure if the version you db-spammed was spam; at least one of her books has won some impressive awards, so we probably want to have an article about her, even if the tone was a little off. Then you db-copyvio'd it, and you might be right about that, but not at the url you listed; there was only one short paragraph about her at that page, so the whole page can't be a copyvio. Do please delete any part of the article that's a copyvio, and if you find another webpage that this article is a copyvio of, tag it and I'll probably be the one to bag it (this week, anyway). (Watchlisting) - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 00:18, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Have you checked the deletion log for this page? I'm pretty sure that it was deleted for copyvio at the listed URL some time ago. I've also just done another search on the text for this page and found this source where the article does some cherrypicking from. I personally think that removing material that violates copyvio here would necessitate a fundamental rewrite of the entire article, and from the looks of her achievements she deserves better. TheLetterM (talk) 00:29, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for searching. I see the content has been removed from the article now; could you keep an eye on it and make sure the copyvio stuff doesn't creep back in for a week or two? I think we want an article on this author. - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 02:42, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly. TheLetterM (talk) 04:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure of deletion policies, but Nicktoons: And the Ancient Crystal needs to be deleted. There is no record of it being produced or developed by anyone ever. It was created by this user, who has created false pages before, even. BOVINEBOY2008 14:13, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I added a prod-2 template to endorse the deletion, though to be quite honest I could tag it for Speedy Deletion under criteria G3, or pure vandalism--from what I see, hoaxes tend to fall under this criteria. TheLetterM (talk) 16:10, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did not know how to insert an in page wikipedia link. Thanks for helping me out. btw, can u suggest somebody to mentor me in the intricacies of wikipedia??? Thanks again Debangshu Mukherjee

I've declined the speedy deletion request for this album, as it is a recording by a notable artist (The Legendary Pink Dots). However, it was really hard to figure out and took a help desk post to clarify. I've cleaned it up some, but it still needs some care. Best, TNXMan 20:55, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

Well, you put a guideline of what to do (and not to), so i thought i should explain myself before removing that from my page :-)

Kosmix is obviously noticeable by now, and i deleted the speedy deletion tag only to put the {hangon} tag (that i learned in WP guidelines). I probably shouldn't have deleted the first tag, but i thought i could do that since i was replacing it to another tag.

By the way, the {hangon} tag was already removed by an admin, and everything is ok now.

jes (talk) 18:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Condense....good. Could I request that you also add the actor names next to their characters. I haven't had a chance to see the film yet, so I've had to stay away from the plot section since it was released.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:21, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't there be a page about Danielle Doran? Matthew Francis (talk) 21:00, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, hope you don't mind, but I've declined this speedy as it does seem to me to have context. ϢereSpielChequers 20:10, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did some major trimming to the article and added sources. And have now just found and added multiple awards from various organizations... 2005: Aegis Awards Winners and finalists recognition[4], 2006: two awards at the 27th annual Telly Awards[5], 2007: they won a Radio-Television News Directors Association of the Carolinas (RTNDAC) Award for "Best Student Television Newscast".[6], 2008: Three awards at the 29th annual Telly Awards[7], and the 2009 Broadcast Education Association awards[8][9]. I think it has enough independent notability after being trimmed and properly sourced to exist as a stand-alone. Best regards, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Treachery#Current Since I'm kinda new here, I don't know how does the things work and I have a question about page above. Is it gonna be deleted or what? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phoenix98 (talk • contribs) 00:13, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You tagged it for deletion and then deleted it straight away without discussion on its notability, as far as i know this is not how things are done on wikipedia. Weeman com (talk) 02:33, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• sorry i see it wasnt yourself who done this, it was user: orangemike —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weeman com (talk • contribs) 02:35, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TheLetterM,
Thanks for your feedback concerning the article. I can certainly try to do a rewrite of the article sometime in the near future as you bring up a valid point about it not being as accessible to the general audience as it could be. I mostly mean this article to be something for the scientific community, but I think it's important to do a rewrite just so other people might be able to make use of it to. I don't know if I'll be able to rewrite it sometime this week, but I definitely would like to change it so it reads better. Thanks for the input!
Chuckw2 (talk) 15:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)Chuckw2[reply]

Honey Please! You ain't gotta do that! Matthew Francis (talk) 19:28, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Winner of "Annie J Cannon Award" in 2000. Trosentover (talk) 02:23, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Movie Animation Studio company it's mine. Only that it doesn't exist the company, it's a home studio company, like Paws Inc. (Garfield's company) in it's first 3 years, that was in the home of Jim Davis in 1978. In the first comic strip says Paws Inc. and the paws inc. doesn't existed until 1981. Sorry if i'm violating something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheOneBeatle (talk • contribs) 02:44, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, the company is named like this. I will cut the word Inc. to only became Movie Animation Studio that's all right? I'm currently in process of this page, this company it's also a page of youtube as my theonebeatle channel. --TheOneBeatle (talk) 02:52, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, no, it's only a home studio like Paws Inc. was the first three years. Still, only it's an article, if the studio really exist someday, i will publish it. But if not, i'll delete it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheOneBeatle (talk • contribs) 03:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello TheLetterM, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I have deleted a page you tagged (Feeling the vibe) under a different criteria, because the one you provided was inappropriate or incorrect. CSD criteria are narrow and specific, and the process is more effective if the correct deletion rationale is supplied. Consider reviewing the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any queries, please let me know. Thanks again! Ale_Jrb^talk 21:38, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please: You deleted it under a different criterion. (Criteria is plural.) Michael Hardy (talk) 01:46, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added plenty of reliable sources on the NickiMinaj page and I wanted you to visit it to make sure you cosign it as legitimate. Also, please move/redirect the page to Nicki Minaj and change the title to "Nicki Minaj." Thanks! Marvinrashad (talk) 03:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hello. this is the user of Dockofusa (talk) 21:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC). i am glad that you removed the Intel Inc USA page. That's b/c i forgot to log off a computer at my place of work and someone created that page.[reply]

Thanks again.

Feel free to reply.

Dockofusa (talk) 21:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The lauren weedman page please sorry i though i could create it but i cant

Hello TheLetterM, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I have deleted a page you tagged (2009 Prank 911 call) under a criterion different from the one your provided, which was inappropriate or incorrect. CSD criteria are narrow and specific to protect the encyclopedia, and the process is more effective if the correct deletion rationale is supplied. Consider reviewing the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Thanks again! Killiondude (talk) 07:06, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is a standard practice here, that anyone who has received an obit in the NY Times (or the London Times) is considered notable for Wikipediapurposes, because they are selective enough to show notability DGG ( talk ) 14:55, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for letting me know. TheLetterM (talk) 14:57, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello TheLetterM, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Simon curtis - a page you tagged - because: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. decltype (talk) 01:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see now that the article was AfD'ed under a different capitalization, so it turns out that it was eligible for deletion anyway (but not under A7). My bad. decltype (talk) 01:51, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello TheLetterM, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Spildew has been removed. It was removed by TimothyIrvin with the following edit summary '(I updated the history of the game and the rules of the game. Also I deleted the deletion code.)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with TimothyIrvin before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:37, 5 October 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 20:37, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just letting you know, User:Lorenzo (cantautore) and User:Lorenzo Cappiello have created hoax articles on Lorenzo Cappiello already, with the former being blocked as a sock of the latter. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 18:29, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: I deleted that article, too. I'm not so sure that it's the same person. The sockpuppet accounts were all dumping in the same content (which was actually a partial copyright violation). This one is quite different, though they do share the use of Amazon cloud services. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 18:29, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

why does my page not assert nobility. i ahve been to onwe of these competions as a spectator and i loved it. it looks like ironchef but with jewish food. the prize was huge that year. (it was 2006) the guy won with a american apple pie version of a matrzo bri. i have found no other cooking contests like this and therefore asserts nobility as a cookoff —Preceding unsigned comment added by Firl21 (talk • contribs) 12:52, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TheLetterM,

Thank you for caring about getting the Wikipedia message through to me with someone else assistance.

I am commited not only to re-write the Ava 'N Zak article - which I already started - but also to be a constant contributor to Wikipedia.

However I have so much to learn. I pretty much learn all that I learned just to be able to do what you saw yesterday, well, yesterday.

I asked DMacks to help me getting my article in Wikipedia format, which I know what it is but I have no idea how to do it.

If you think you can also help me I will be most appreciative.

Once again Thanks,

Sincerely,

Eleonora Salazney 01:53, 2 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abfabsol (talk • contribs)

Thanks TheLetterM.

Wow, you are super fast and also always on line!

Sincerely,

Eleonora Salazney 02:02, 2 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abfabsol (talk • contribs)

Your G11 speedy tag was declined, so I sent the article to afd. DMacks (talk) 14:21, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You know, this sounded funny. Bearian (talk) 22:40, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there M :). Just letting you know that I replaced your warning at User talk:Vanilla Cake becca. This is because I feel that although the user has misinterpreted Wikipedia's purpose, they appear to be acting in good faith, which means that it is not vandalism, and categorising their edits as vandalism may be bitey. Hope that's okay. Best, - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 18:36, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Right. I wasn't sure under what criteria the page should be tagged under--A3 definitely makes more sense. Thanks for letting me know. Best, TheLetterM (talk) 18:38, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  That's fine, but next time you're not sure what criteria a page should be deleted under, make sure you don't mark it :). It's important that the user gets the correct warning or they won't know what they did wrong, and therefore won't be able to stop it. Anyway, most of your patrolling is pretty good, so keep it up :) - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 19:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:VH-Posthumous.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 19:30, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ok thanxSthowp (talk) 07:27, 21 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sthowp (talk • contribs) 07:24, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I understand why this article was deleted but I would greatly appreciate it if you could email me a copy of the article. You can contact me at [email protected]. Thanks for your time. Seanx8p2 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:20, 21 January 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Uh, the stuff with Jim Greenwood is a pretty important part of the founding of UC Merced's Greek life. I'm super new to editing at wikipedia, so if I need to cite it somehow, I can get Nick Nakamura or Jordan Hauer-Laurencin or Chris Thomas to do like an audio or something on the start of Greek Life. More than 1000 signatures were gathered from the school when it only had about 2000 students. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robotman666 (talk • contribs) 00:52, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• You're gonna run into problems if you're going to cite it like this--please read Wikipedia's policies regarding what constitutes reliable sources. While I'm sure the individuals you've mentioned would be able to shed light on what you've mentioned, you wouldn't be able to cite that person based on a first-hand interview or whatever--it'd have to be published in some way (see WP:PRIMARY)--perhaps in the Sun-Star or The Prodigy (though student newspapers don't carry the weight that regular newspapers do) or in an other reliably-sourced entity. Editing Wikipedia when you're starting out and not fully aware of all the policies that apply can be really daunting, so at the very least make sure you read up as much as you can on them to make sure you're informed. Hope this helps, TheLetterM (talk) 05:49, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• That information isn't anywhere. What do I do then? -Robotman 666

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:01, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:11, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]