User talk:Mmarque

March 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on James Hansen. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Atmoz (talk) 18:09, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Hi, I nominated File:Akasofu.jpg, File:Nielsen.jpg, and File:Gerhard kramm.jpg for deletion as copyright violations and File:Nicole Molders.jpg for lacking a source. Regards Hekerui (talk) 22:31, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 2011

Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to July 8, as "minor" only if they truly 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. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 03:06, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Gerhard Kramm for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gerhard Kramm 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/Gerhard Kramm 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 template from the top of the article. Sailsbystars (talk) 20:26, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for contributing to the AfD. But you will be more effective if you make a cogent case for retention there (as I assume you prefer), rather than a straight cut-and-paste. As it stands, your contrib is confusing. TIA, Pete Tillman (talk) 17:50, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of Arbitration Committee sanctions related to climate change

Hello Mmarque. This is to make you aware that the Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to Climate change. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process.

Please know that my message here is not meant to allege any misconduct on your part, but only to make you aware of the sanctions so that you can avoid trouble. Be mindful that anyone who engages in inappropriate behavior in this area may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read in the Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change#Final decision section of the decision page.

It would be well to familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 01:59, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments about me

Your comments about me at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gerhard_Kramm are unambiguously personal attacks (see WP:NPA: "Comment on content, not on the contributor."). Please strike them out. Thank you. --JBL (talk) 12:27, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Same applies to your comments about me and User:Joshua Halpern on the same article for deletion page - "Aryan Physics" for example seems a clear violation of WP:NPA. The only relevant discussion there should have been about the notability criteria themselves; speculating on various peoples motivations or competency for questioning or defending seem way out of place. ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:37, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have raised this issue at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Mmarque. --JBL (talk) 14:58, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MMarque, could you please tone it down a bit? You're not helping your (or my) case over there. Thanks, Pete Tillman (talk) 20:23, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ro Bailey.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

File:Ro Bailey.jpg

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 04:44, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Ro Bailey.jpg

The file File:Ro Bailey.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]