User talk:Gargabook

Welcome!

Hello, Gargabook, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Luke Anscombe, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Camw (talk) 06:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Luke Anscombe

The article Luke Anscombe has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Probable hoax about non-notable person. Story keeps changing with each recreation of the page, first Everton FC then Beijing Guoan on an edit to Ayr, Queensland.

Cannot verify the information provided. No news coverage found in reliable sources.

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. Camw (talk) 06:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Brad Jones (footballer), did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. 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. Nath1991 (talk) 01:58, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did with this edit to Julia Gillard, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. L Kensington (talk • contribs) 02:36, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Fox Broadcasting Company, you may be blocked from editing.

Rumor Austar Channels

Please do not put future channels on the List of Austar Channels page if you do not have a referrence for them. I refuse to include rumors on the page.

Speedy deletion nomination of Australia is Awesome

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. 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 - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. 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. WhaleyTim (talk) 05:59, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Ayr State High School, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --Kinu ^t/_c 06:35, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Tiffany Jane Anscombe

A tag has been placed on Tiffany Jane Anscombe 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 - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. 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. ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ _―Œ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 09:30, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 06:30, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Army

Hello, The Australian Army's main doctrine publication, The Fundamentals of Land Warfare provides information on the role of the Army and the high-level strategies it uses in different scenarios. This is publicly available and used to be in the Army's website, but seems to have been removed for some reason - you should be able to find a copy in most large public libraries. However, I don't think that the Army has publicly published the kind of tactical details you're interested in - these would be contained in field manuals which I believe are generally considered confidential. Nick-D (talk) 11:29, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For Army protocol (not to be confused with tactics, which are classified as stated by Nick-D), see here. For RAAF customs, see here. Cheers, AusTerrapin (talk) 23:28, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thanks :)

Hi, Gargabook. I saw your comment on the ADF article talk page and thought I'd offer this. You can get some very interesting information on the Army's customs and traditions in Looking Forward, Looking Back: Customs and Traditions of the Australian Army by Christopher Jobson. Like Nick said, though, the information about tactical doctrine, planning etc. is classified (although mostly only at "restricted" level, which nevertheless means unless you are a member, or hold a security clearance, you don't get to see it). Having said this, usually information can be gleaned from reading general histories about recent conflicts, although due to operational security you will probably only be able to find detailed accounts of operations up to and including Vietnam. David Horner's Duty First (2008) also has some details about recent operations, but out of necessity it is quite light on recent operational details. The various corps of the Army also usually have their own histories which can provide more details. For example, my lot has published a number of volumes [1],[2], [3]. These are usually available at the various State libraries in capital cities, but you can check their availability by searching on Worldcat.org and inputing your postcode. It will then tell you the nearest library to your location that has the book. Hope this helps in some way. Cheers. AustralianRupert (talk) 10:24, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ignorance

Your edit to Ignorance is awfully close to vandalism. I didn't notice it at first because your edit summary was "put innocence in" even though the edit was solely to attack Americans. Hopefully that wasn't a deliberate attempt to avoid detection. --JaGa^talk 18:10, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

November 2010

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Floquenbeam (talk) 05:21, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how many warnings you think you should get before you get blocked, but it turns out that it's this many. --Floquenbeam (talk) 05:23, 16 November 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

are you just being racist, your being a nationalistic vandal and you are just jealous of india rising, you are just jealous that what i have said is true, you are abusing your privilidges and are jealous of the emergence of india

Decline reason:

My presumption is that your personal attacks indicate you are finished with this account. Kuru (talk) 02:02, 17 November 2010 (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.

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gargabook for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. Shovon (talk) 12:02, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Tertiary enrollment for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tertiary enrollment is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tertiary enrollment until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

Boleyn (talk) 19:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]