User talk:Mooseman33

October 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Captain Underpants, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Favonian (talk) 11:17, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Snake Eater. 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. Favonian (talk) 11:18, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Lance Armstrong. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Barret (talk) 11:58, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Egyptian God cards, you will be blocked from editing. Barret (talk) 12:00, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Brown eyes (disambiguation). Alansohn (talk) 12:00, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The question of all time

Are you allowed to vandalize your own talk page?

Depends what you mean by 'vandalize'. Have look at WP:UP#NOT before you vent all your frustrations. Favonian (talk) 12:10, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uhh what about 'I suck!"

Don't be too hard on yourself—leave that to the other editors :) Favonian (talk) 12:15, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Richard Reid (journalist)

A tag has been placed on Richard Reid (journalist) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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. Darrenhusted (talk) 20:34, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Richard Reid (journalist)

The article Richard Reid (journalist) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Only functioning reference is a Facebook page

While all constructive 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Charles Matthews (talk) 20:28, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Porky pie listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Porky pie. Since you had some involvement with the Porky pie redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mr. Guye (talk) 22:13, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]