User talk:Richard C. Stone

Hello.

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to GE AC4400CW, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Robevans123 (talk) 09:45, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at USS Collingsworth (APA-146). Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Please stop adding irrelevant categories to articles Robevans123 (talk) 10:00, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user appears to be adding only creating irrelevant categories and has not contributed anything as far as I can see.11:56, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Terageorge (talk) 13:10, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Richard C. - you seem to have made a lot of edits to articles adding unrelated categories. If this is just experimentation, please stop working on articles and use your sandbox for experimentation. See Help:My sandbox for details on experimenting in your own sandbox.

You may also like to look at Wikipedia:FAQ/Categorization and Help:Getting started. Regards Robevans123 (talk) 15:09, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Richard C. Stone, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Richard C. Stone! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Lightbreather (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:13, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

hey, slow on AFDS

Hey, I see you just opened 5 separate AFDs in 5 minutes time, in scattered topic areas, and in the same time did notifications and did other edits. Hey, there's no rush! Slow down! Per wp:AFD guidelines, you should do some searching and try to meet wp:BEFORE. It's not required, but suggested. --do ncr am 05:25, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

sorry Richard C. Stone (talk) 05:26, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qizjeh is a nomination of a wp:disambiguation page for deletion, on stated grounds that it does not meet notability requirements. I think you don't know what a disambiguation page is; they do not even allow sourcing, they just provide navigation. Also I saw you moved another disambiguation page, from "something House" to "something House (disambiguation)". That was wrong by disambiguation guidelines, too. Can you reverse that move, or, if you can't directly, please address by making a technical move request, at wp:RM. Maybe you should withdraw some of your other AFDs and revert some other edits, too. --do ncr am 05:38, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see you riled some others, too...and you have been blocked at least temporarily. Hey, I assume you were editing in good faith. While blocked, you can edit only here at your own Talk page, i think. You can compose a request to be unblocked, but, I suggest you read up on some policies and guidelines first. In your unblock request, if you make one, you would probably do better to show some understanding of what was wrong with various of your edits. Anyhow, good luck. --do ncr am 05:47, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Slow down

You seem to be making tons of arbitrary, unconstructive edits in very short succession. I'm considering blocking you for causing disruption. Please explain your thinking with these edits here ASAP. Thanks, Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:33, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

sorry will stop immediately Richard C. Stone (talk) 05:34, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. 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 adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Articles for Creation

Hi. I noticed you signed up to review articles at AfC. Just so you know, the very minimum requirement is 500 article space edits. It also requires a far greater knowledge of notability and verifiability than you have been demonstrating with your editing. John from Idegon (talk) 05:38, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Materialscientist (talk) 06:15, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]