User talk:Msy2fla

Welcome!

Hello, Msy2fla, 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 Philip Marshall, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

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! Ironholds (talk) 19:23, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Philip Marshall

A tag has been placed on Philip Marshall requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. 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 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. Ironholds (talk) 19:23, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Philip Marshall

A tag has been placed on Philip Marshall requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. 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 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. Rockstone (talk) 21:38, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

911

Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia :) First of all, there is nothing wrong in reporting from a neutral point of view, and to present "the other side" of a story. However, the articles you contributed to had asserted the claims you mention to external sources, while your claims had no sources listed, especially this edit. There is never an universal truth, and Wikipedias goal isn't to tell the "absolute" truth, but to give people enough information so that they can decide for themselves what to think, by providing and explaining various points of views seen from a neutral point of view. You are free to provide additional information, and I think that the theory linked to above would be a good addition to the article about 911 conpiracy theories, assuming that you can provide reliable external sources for it. Bjelleklang - talk 19:17, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a sandbox yes, see Wikipedia: Sandbox. I would not reccommend that you use this to work on new articles, as it's reset fairly often. Instead, start a temporary article in your own userspace, for example User:Msy2fla/9-11 and write up a new section. When you feel that it's complete, link to it on the talkpage of the full article and ask for opinions and feedback. Do not insert it straight into the article without discussion, as this will only result in it being removed as well as aggravating others.

There are no mechanisms to stop any groups from "planting" editors, or to stop biased editors; but usually biased edits will be noticed, reverted and the author notified. If they persist, it may or may not result in them being blocked for various periods of time, or in severe cases for ever. If you take a look at some of the links listed in the welcoming message you should be able to see the various policies we have to keep Wikipedia as unbiased as possible. Bjelleklang - talk 21:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Talk:September 11 attacks has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Quantpole (talk) 21:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]