User talk:Steve.fami.ly

Hello Steve.fami.ly! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! St.daniel 21:35, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Support Our Families

While I was rewriting Support Our Families you deleted it. I reposted it as a completely different article with the same title. Is there another way to go about posting it now that it is wiki material? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Steve.fami.ly (talk • contribs) 20:19, 13 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

You just did it. Stifle (talk) 20:45, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied on my talk page. --Media anthro 23:14, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ral315 deleted Support Our Families today saying that it was recreation of a deleted article and then protected it so it couldn't be recreated. Can you please help me by undoing this deletion and protection? I know that the last time you read it you still thought it should be deleted - I since edited it (now it addressses verifiable usage on over 50,000 results in google). Either way, as you noted above the content was completely different and it seems that the manner in which it was deleted was inappropriate. I agree that it was promotional and therefore worthy of deletion when you deleted it. That alone doesn't seem like reason enough not to give it a chance now. I honestly think it was a valid contribution and put in a lot of time responding to every piece of feeback I received to make it so and am frustrated that it was deleted instantly without giving me a period of time to justify it to the community. Steve.fami.ly 21:23, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I do not have discretion to override other admins. You can make a listing at Wikipedia:Deletion review instead. Stifle (talk) 21:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While to the strictest meaning of the word, it was not a recreation, it was, however, pushing the boundaries of recreation, as it was a less subtle advertisement for supportourfamilies.com. It was also only a dictionary definition, which also is not allowed on Wikipedia. Ral315 (talk) 15:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox

you wanted a sandbox? Here you go. --Larry laptop 22:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Support our families.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Support our families.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 15:54, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support Our Families

You should be aware of Wikipedia's neutral-point-of-view policy. Do not use the encyclopedia to promote yourself or your organizations. Superm401 - Talk 05:55, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

Hello, I'm Praxidicae. I noticed that you recently removed content from Stop the Steal without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. This has already been discussed on the talk page - if you think it should still be deleted, you need to take it to WP:AFD. Praxidicae (talk) 14:51, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"We Believe (yard sign)" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect We Believe (yard sign). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 13#We Believe (yard sign) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:02, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. MB 21:40, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Restored comment

The comment you undid here is not vandalism. Please read WP:Vandalism. I've restored it. Paul August ☎ 21:57, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion open about your editing at WP:ANI#Article ownership issue. Please read WP:OWN and please stop reverting all edits and talk page comments at Talk:Black_Lives_Matter-themed_signs. Thank you. Fences&Windows 22:32, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked temporarily from editing to prevent further vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

-- Hoary (talk) 04:13, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

American politics discretionary sanctions notice

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:33, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Advocacy using unreliable primary sources

Sources like these that promote baseless conspiracy theories like "The COVID-19 opportunity may have been leveraged to shutdown the whole world for the sole purpose of stopping President Trump from getting re-elected." are not acceptable for Wikipedia. I highly suggest consulting WP:RSP and WP:RSN and its archives to determine what sources can be used. Please also see WP:PRIMARY, WP:RS and WP:NOT. —Paleo Neonate – 08:45, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]