User talk:Marcosoldfox

Welcome!

Hello, Marcosoldfox, 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, such as Filthy frank, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

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 Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, 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:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Dai Pritchard (talk) 14:26, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Filthy frank

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Filthy frank 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 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. Dai Pritchard (talk) 14:26, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Andy Gillion

The article Andy Gillion 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. -- Sam ^Sing! 10:28, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Larking Love

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Larking Love 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 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. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 09:13, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Evetta Muradasilova

The article Evetta Muradasilova 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. Wgolf (talk) 04:28, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Raoul Meyer

The article Raoul Meyer has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability per WP:AUTHOR or WP:ACADEMIC.

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. Dai Pritchard (talk) 05:37, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of Bloodborne characters for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Bloodborne characters 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/List of Bloodborne characters 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. AdrianGamer (talk) 04:35, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

April 2015

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. — MShabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 10:48, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) 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 necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 23:53, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Pomegranate tiger

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Pomegranate tiger 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 or musician, 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. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 14:35, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Daangal

Hallo, in this edit you added {{stub}} to an article which already had {{Pakistan-film-stub}}, and added {[tl|refimprove}} to an article which had no references. Please take more care. Thanks. PamD 16:53, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2015

Hello, I'm Iryna Harpy. An edit that you recently made to Western betrayal seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page.
Please don't change grammatically correct content if your knowledge of English grammar is weak. Your copyedit made an illiterate mess of a serviceable sentence. Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:46, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Germany-Spain relations

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Germany-Spain relations requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. 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. Underscorre (talk) 07:44, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 16 June

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 Pyrrhus of Epirus 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, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Henrik Enderlein, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Free 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) 11:11, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Anarcho-capitalist Stalinism for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anarcho-capitalist Stalinism 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/Anarcho-capitalist Stalinism 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. Soman (talk) 01:22, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

November 2015

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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 to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:16, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was debating whether or not to give you an indefinite WP:NOTHERE block for creating a hoax, but I'm going to give you a brief one instead. Creating a hoax article is vandalism and one of the worst things you could have done. There's no benefit to doing this, as now you've pretty much put all of your prior edits in question and they're the only reason why you're not getting an indefinite block right now. The problem is that now I have to question whether or not those other edits are good ones or if they're an attempt by yourself to further vandalize Wikipedia.

Right now what I want you to do is to read over the guidelines on Wikipedia at WP:TRAINING and at WP:HOAX. You need to be able to show that we can trust you now that you've essentially gone and done one of the worst things you can do on Wikipedia. I also have to warn you that if you do anything like this again in the future, it'll very, very likely end with you getting indefinitely blocked from editing. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:21, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 17:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Piotr Belousov, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vladimir Serov. 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) 09:09, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Carl Frederik von Breda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Ramsay. 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) 08:59, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sérgio Moro, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paraná. 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) 09:05, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of William Travassos

The article William Travassos 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. ubiquity (talk) 21:59, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eliseu Padilha

Thanks for creating this stub article.

Please don't add Category:Stubs: just add the {{stub}} template or one of the subject-specific stub template (as you did here), which adds the category and also creates a note at the foot of the page. If you leave the "Stubs" category, it comes up on the list for people stub-sorting, unnecessarily.

I noticed that the DEFAULTSORT had a completely different name (Ponde, Luiz). Please take more care when recycling content from one article to another! Thanks. PamD 09:22, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dog anatomy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Canine. 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) 14:53, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Juan de Mariana Institute) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Juan de Mariana Institute, Marcosoldfox!

Wikipedia editor Denver20 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Your Page has been Approved!! Congratulations Denver F. 12:34, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

To reply, leave a comment on Denver20's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

March 2016

Hello, I'm Ravensfire. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Cory in the House has been undone because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Ravensfire (talk) 13:07, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

April 2016

Hello. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Ainsley Harriott has been undone because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Dcirovic (talk) 02:50, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Annie Hall. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. General Ization ^Talk 21:14, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Ravioli, you may be blocked from editing. RickinBaltimore (talk) 20:13, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Aaron Paul. General Ization ^Talk 02:10, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for continued disruption. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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 to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 02:12, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 23 May

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 José Luiz Datena page, your edit caused a URL error (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) 00:19, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Newton Ishii, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Brazilian and Paraná. 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) 11:01, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 14 June

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 Biel (singer) page, your edit caused a URL error (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) 00:19, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rudolf Abel

Marcosoldfox,

Could you sign your comment on Rudolf Abel talkpage please. So it can be archived. Adamdaley (talk) 08:38, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Leandro Karnal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page History of America. 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) 09:58, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Marcosoldfox. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Abramovay was not a good example of an article started as WP:AUTHOR and WP:PROF apply and they show no Notability here. SwisterTwister talk 15:16, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Marcosoldfox. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Marcosoldfox. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged Corruption of Jared Kushner

Please do not add content or create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who create or add such material will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. KidAd talk 01:11, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Marcussoldfox, I think you should move your article to draft space and to a different, more neutral, title focusing on Kushner's role in the White House instead of his assumed "corruption". Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:34, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Liz Any idea on how I should do it then to make it more neutral and non-partisan? What's wrong with it, honestly? It's all backed up 100%. Any help on it would honestly be quite appreciated; I just don't want it to go to waste 100%.

I've given you my advice, move it to Draft space and/or move it to a more neutral title. And do it NOW. It could be deleted at any moment. It will be much more difficult to restore after it's been deleted than just moving it right now and then tweaking it over the next few days. I passed on deleting it but it only takes one admin to agree with the tagging and delete it at any moment. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:11, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the advice. I'm trying to do my best to finish it so that it's neutral in every way. I guess that what people think of him is not my place to decide, but the editors'. I have changed it to "Public Perception of Jared Kushner", and took out a lot of things. Hopefully there won't be any outright partisan Trump loyalists who want to take down everything to do with the corruption of the current administration (they have a really active role in shaping up the internet's rhetoric) and try to silence even completely neutral and fully backed up information about public officials and public servants. Thanks a lot for your help.

I don't know if the current title best reflects your article content but we have other articles with this title (Public Perception of X) and it is a big improvement. I think if an editor wants to see it deleted, it'll need to go through an AfD deletion discussion and won't be tagged for speedy deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:34, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject or any other entity. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. JJP...MASTER!_{[talk to] JJP... master?} 19:15, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Public Perception of Jared Kushner, to Wikipedia, as doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Wikipedia:Your first article; you might also consider using the Article Wizard. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. This was deleted at AfD. Please respect the consensus. Spiderone 22:41, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Public Perception of Jared Kushner

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Public Perception of Jared Kushner requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Public Perception of Jared Kushner. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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 "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 deleted 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. Spiderone 22:38, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Public Perception of Jared Kushner, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Cameo and Vanity Fair. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:21, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to WikiProject of Current Events

Hello. I wanted to invite you to the WikiProject of Current Events as you have done excellent work in the Trump–Raffensperger scandal article. Most editors are not aware that the WikiProject became active again back in April 2020 (Had been inactive/hibernation for years). I just wanted to invite you and hope you will consider joining. (WikiProject of Current Events lead coordinator) Elijahandskip (talk) 05:25, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Just some friendly advice, don't try to act like a Wiki admin. It can get you into trouble...saying that from experience.

Hi, hello User:Elijahandskip. And yeah, thanks for inviting me into a new project -- that seems kinda nice. But yeah, I'm actually thinking of giving wikipedia a break for a long, long while cause it's getting sort of tiring for me on writing it and getting references for everything that is written, and it does get tiring after a while. I'm gonna give myself a long break from writing in wikipedia, I think, but I appreciate you inviting me on your project and I'm gonna go take a look at it. I really enjoy seeing and reading about stuff on politics (especially as of recently) and so I really wanted to write on it, so I've been giving my best shot; but it really does take a really long while to write much less than what I'd usually write without needing to reference myself all the time. Mostly I enjoy writing essays and short-stories and I've given wikipedia a try as of recently from this really old account I have; but it's proven to be more tiring than what I remembered -- all this referencing back and forth etc. I'm thinking of going back to writing essays and giving this wikipedia thing a good break, to be quite honest. I've seen you've been trying to change the titling of my last article on Trump-Raffensperger scandal, but some other editor thought it'd be better to move-block it for the while, so that's about that page; I'm not thinking of editing any more wiki pages for any time soon though; it's too much work and too little reward, I've discovered. Thanks for inviting me to your project though -- I appreciate it.Marcosoldfox (talk) 07:52, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've been editing a lot of stuff as of recently and I feel like I've tired myself out a lot, to be quite honest. I am really interested in politics but I'm thinking of giving myself a break on all this political issue -- it gets more maddening everyday. But after having edited (and even warred a little bit, if I'm honest) I'm pretty sure I'm gonna give it a rest and not edit for some good while. It's way too tiring to edit things and ending up having to put in all the references, etc. If you wanna ask me something on my Talk Page though, I'm free to talk about various topics; I really enjoy reading and writing just about anything, to be quite honest. Do you have any interests in philosophy, literature etc? Marcosoldfox (talk) 07:52, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah I understand. I took a 2 month break from editing Wiki earlier in the year. The Trump-Raffensperger scandal title was in the process of a "move-war" and I hadn't done my research into the move-war history before I got involved. The move I did was my fault. I had seen you make a message on the talk page about moving the title and then the next edit was a title move. In my quick editor thinking, I thought I saw a "Solo-editor". That is why the talk page about the issue had a very long discussion about it. I didn't even checked a discussion above which wanted the move. That was my fault for not checking earlier discussions before doing a revert, so I am sorry for making you think you were in trouble on the talk page. Elijahandskip (talk) 11:56, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I don't have a "huge" interest in literature or philosophy, though philosophy is something I have studied before...small amount of studying. Also funny you should mention politics getting crazier everyday. So about two months ago, I actually had a political blog. I might or might not (I 100% did) start one of the longest RFC's in history and 1/5 of the entire RFC was discussion about a logical thing I mentioned in my blog...and why I even had a political blog. After the RFC concluded, I decided to copy/paste it into a word document just to see the size; 14 pages. So an RFC that I started had a 2 page discussion just about a political blog I created. Even though politics can seem so crazy, you still have to remember to have some laughter, especially in the world we live in today. Elijahandskip (talk) 11:56, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's totally cool. That article was fun to create and I just saw the news on the internet about this call coming out and I immediately saw how crazy it was... although I have to agree everything that has happened the last 4 years has been really crazy. You know, I have a literal member of my family who started going schizophrenic one year back, and he had a real problem with ADHD medication; and then I was feeling really bored and with nothing to do so I created an article out of news of Trump (I had listened to the whole audio after it had come out on NBC) -- then I instantly saw how Trump sounded just like my uncle during his deteriorating state... just like my crazy uncle who kept calling me at the middle of the night to talk for one hour straight -- just talking nonsense. I listened to what was on Youtube and started thinking Trump sounds just like my psychotic uncle -- the constant sniffing, the unstoppable, almost incoherent babbling that he does on the call with his mind deterioration, not even allowing the other speaker to answer -- crazy signs when someone is becoming psychotic. There is this book, called The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump by Brandy Lee that is really interesting and that talks about the psychology of the Trump phenomenon and everything; it's all very interesting. I really do think that Trump has got some real personality and psychiatric disorders that he has to deal with; although I'm not an expert on anything, I'm just some guy from the internet, speculating on a president's mental state -- but Trump most likely does have malignant personality disorder or something similar. I mean, just listen to the things that he says. There's even this psychologist/psychiatrist called John Gartner that talks on a documentary about Trump about his deranged mental state; and Trump is just... so insane, seeing everything that he has said and done."Psychologist-backed documentary labels Trump 'malignant narcissist'".... But either way, sometimes it's fun to just think about the mental state of US presidents, right? I mean, it's said that Bill Clinton used to have bipolar disorder, and that it actually helped him when he was president; but I think that the greatest danger really lies that it can all just derail to psychosis -- just like my uncle, that started going wild and drunk and doing stupid shit all around until every person on the street could see he had a screw loose on the head. He eventually developed Psychosis and then full-blown schizophrenia by the end. Anyway, making an article about it was interesting and I've been reading a lot on the news and stuff. Listening though on the internet about the things Trump said on the call-audio did remind me of a deteriorating state of mind just like that of my uncle; but thinking about it, it was all that we already knew anyway about the guy president -- he's just losing his mind; nobody needs to know any further than that from the movies, documentaries, etc, which are all out there. Heck, even Jimmy Kimmel and Jimmy Fallon are all the time making fun of the guy and everyone seems to notice he's also got a screw loose -- like that "crazy uncle" we all come to know at some point in our lives. Ever seen that trailer for that movie about Trump -- Unfit: The Psychology of Trump? "Unfit: The Psychology of Donald Trump - Official Trailer".</ref> It's a fun movie. It's not a great movie cause it still has some flaws, but it is a good movie -- I found the trailers particularly well made though. Anyway, it's cool that you aren't bothered by the article-moving title; honestly I just want to have nothing to do with it and all the boring-tedious editing and instead just let the other editors do the rest and do whatever. And yeah, thinking about politics is really stressful all the time -- this I think everyone is starting to agree, especially in US politics which has turned so divided. But don't mistake me for one of those cringe-y NeverTrumpers though that just hate Don the Con for no reason whatsoever; I think Biden also has his fair share of problems too... All parties sort of suck, really; but I don't want to talk more about politics because then I'd get completely lost in it and it's all just insane. Honestly, even though at the beginning and in 2016 I thought that Trump was literally the greatest candidate of the Republican Party (remember the funny memes that were posted all around the internet at that time? I miss those times.), cause he really did sound like a different guy and especially an extremely funny person that was strong at the same time. And he was a newcomer at the time and really sounded like he was going to shake things up... and don't get me started on the memes. My god, the memes were so funny. It's just that time has passed and Trump didn't do anything and everything just about stayed the same -- all boring. I'm not biased though when I write in wikipedia -- not at all; but I think there just is really unanimous support on matters about the guy -- that he's going cray-cray. I mean, look at all the things he's done so far with everything. But yeah, I basically just started the article about the call as reported by the news agencies and then the other editors quickly picked up from there and now most of it is written by them... and to think I'm just some dude online who's got no expertise on anything writing whatever he wants on wikipedia; but yeah, that's the beauty of wikipedia, right? That anyone can edit even not knowing anything of the matter at hand beyond just referring to sources. Oh and besides, about the last four years, the best thing is that everything in the past 4 years in political terms has been really funny; and all the memes that we've had really gave us a chance for laughter -- I just think it's sad that so many people died from COVID-19 though; and that was just sad.

Oh and yeah, philosophy is something that I really enjoy a lot. I think that as modern science has been progressing it has started becoming less "noticeable" in some senses but I think the importance of studying philosophy really is how it improves thinking. I think though that the real value in philosophy is in how it makes you think better, and study better; because having a good philosophical outlook on things usually stimulates the inherent curiosity we all have naturally and that brings up a mix intellectual curiosity and creativity. I mean, studying philosophy often makes you smarter because it makes you think better, not because it is more useful by itself. Although when it makes you think in a more intellectual manner, then it sure does have its fair share of uses. I've studied a lot of philosophy in my life; and I mean A LOT --- from Plato to Aristotle to Seneca and to Russell and Wittgenstein --, and I say that studying it has made me smarter and has definitely been the single most important thing to make me not only learn more but to write better. -- studying philosophy always pays off because it is not only thinking about something, it is about learning how to think better itself. Thanks for reading the rambles of some random crazy dude from the internet. Appreciate it.Marcosoldfox (talk) 12:23, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, what I really like the most really is philosophy. I really enjoy thinking and talking about philosophy: Have you ever read Kant, or Hegel, or [[[Nietzsche]]? Nietzsche is my favorite philosopher by far; he really does talk about really a lot of interesting stuff and philosophical problems that seem intriguing and very intellectually-demanding. I've been taking more of a liking of continental philosophy and the like, and staying a little bit further away from Analytical philosophy; although I still do really like both -- they're both enjoyable. Perhaps you've heard of continental philosophy? It came mostly from 19th century writings and especially from Friderich Nietzsche, and that's pretty interesting by itself; he's really written a lot of great works that many philosophers posterior would enjoy, like The Genealogy of Morals. The main proponents of continental philosophy usually are considered to be Nietzsche and Kierkegaard, with Martin Heidegger coming after -- these are really awesome philosophers who really did a lot of work on all sorts of philosophical subjects so these have the most important works of philosophy for a reader to understand continental philosophy. Right now I'm reading a book called "Being and Time" written by Heidegger which is really quite interesting. It is a book in philosophy about the nature of being, something that Heidegger says has been left out by traditional philosophers, in an area of philosophy known as "ontology" -- that is, the study of being. Heidegger is a genius in my opinion, but this work in specific Being and Time is a bit tough to read, and certainly isn't welcome to newcomers in philosophy, which is a shame cause Heidegger's genius should have been expressed in a way more accessible to all but instead he made it as obscure as possible in some passages, in a way just like Hegel in his book The phenomenology of Spirit. Either way, thanks for listening to the ramblings of a random dude online. It's fun to write and I've enjoyed a lot making these paragraphs; they're really quite enjoyable to write (specially with a free flow of thought); and it feels good to think there's people out there reading the stuff I write and that they care enough about it to read it. It makes me feel a lot less lonely (and ever since this pandemic began we've all been lonelier than before, unfortunately). So thanks for your time. Marcosoldfox (talk) 14:34, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Trump–Raffensperger phone call for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Trump–Raffensperger phone call 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/Trump–Raffensperger phone call 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.

SK2242 (talk) 21:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]