User talk:Tuliopakardovas

Pre-Lutheran bibles in vernacular languages moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Pre-Lutheran bibles in vernacular languages, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. Wikipedia is not a reliable source.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). All references should be properly formatted and there should be no foreign language content (table headings). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:19, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Pre-Lutheran bibles in vernacular languages

Hello, Tuliopakardovas. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Pre-Lutheran bibles in vernacular languages".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 22:05, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2020

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to List of conspiracy theories, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. — Newslinger talk 07:21, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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-1932 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.

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 articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. 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.

— Newslinger talk 07:22, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at List of conspiracy theories, you may be blocked from editing. — Newslinger talk 15:26, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits. 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 ~~~~}}. Bishonen | tålk 15:36, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I understand that there's a problem with that subject. I will not change it. But: https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/newsroom/open-society-foundations-announce-recipients-new-executives-fund-award and other reliable sources prove the finance support of George Soros at Planned Parenhood through his Open Society Foundation. With some time I can get more info, also one of the "reliable sources" is The Washington Post, deliberately a newspaper biased against Donald Trump, and...please take a view about who are its shareholders. And. the accusations are against the person of George Soros, they're not about his race of ethnics.

I know that you cannot believe it, and I know the Wikipedia article will keep the same for...a time, that's for I will not touch it anymore. Don't take care of it. --Tuliopakardovas (talk) 15:51, 6 October 2020 (UTC)tuliopakardovas.[reply]