| Revision as of 13:19, 10 June 2010 editSarah (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions18,075 edits →Banned users: typo← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:28, 6 July 2010 edit undoRodhullandemu (talk | contribs)115,150 edits Notification: PUF posting of File:Vocal technique.ogg.Next edit → | ||
| Line 64: | Line 64: | ||
| I've noticed that you've been removing chunks of material from articles for several months, claiming it was added by some unnamed banned user. Please explain who this "banned user" is and how you know who they are. I find your edits really dubious. We are ''not'' obliged to remove edits by banned users but usually decide on a case-by-case basis - we certainly don't do it if it damages the articles because the articles are what we're all here for. If you continue edit warring and deleting material from articles without giving a damn good reason (and some vague "banned user" claim is not a good reason) you're the one who is going to be blocked for damaging articles. I've looked at the history of this page and I see this has been an issue since at least back in February when someone contacted you about the Szymanowski article. FYI, per the ] policy, which allows editors in good standing to take responsibility for a banned user's reverted edits, I've restored that material to the page. ] 13:18, 10 June 2010 (UTC) | I've noticed that you've been removing chunks of material from articles for several months, claiming it was added by some unnamed banned user. Please explain who this "banned user" is and how you know who they are. I find your edits really dubious. We are ''not'' obliged to remove edits by banned users but usually decide on a case-by-case basis - we certainly don't do it if it damages the articles because the articles are what we're all here for. If you continue edit warring and deleting material from articles without giving a damn good reason (and some vague "banned user" claim is not a good reason) you're the one who is going to be blocked for damaging articles. I've looked at the history of this page and I see this has been an issue since at least back in February when someone contacted you about the Szymanowski article. FYI, per the ] policy, which allows editors in good standing to take responsibility for a banned user's reverted edits, I've restored that material to the page. ] 13:18, 10 June 2010 (UTC) | ||
| == Possibly unfree File:Vocal technique.ogg == | |||
| A file that you uploaded or altered, ], has been listed at ] because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the ]. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at ] if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. <!-- Template:Fdw-puf --> --]] 01:28, 6 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:28, 6 July 2010
Welcome
|
Thank you for the brief visit.--Tonalone (talk) 15:44, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello Tonalone: Regarding Malik Ayaz. Your edit removing the 'Anecdotes' section was justified because the section was ostensibly the work of a 'banned editor.' I saw no proof for that assertion. In fact the Anecdotes had been accruing for several years. If you want to edit this article, please have some legitimate reason. Thanks. 69.226.218.19 (talk) 06:48, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Banned users
I've noticed that you've been removing chunks of material from articles for several months, claiming it was added by some unnamed banned user. Please explain who this "banned user" is and how you know who they are. I find your edits really dubious. We are not obliged to remove edits by banned users but usually decide on a case-by-case basis - we certainly don't do it if it damages the articles because the articles are what we're all here for. If you continue edit warring and deleting material from articles without giving a damn good reason (and some vague "banned user" claim is not a good reason) you're the one who is going to be blocked for damaging articles. I've looked at the history of this page and I see this has been an issue since at least back in February when someone contacted you about the Szymanowski article. FYI, per the BAN policy, which allows editors in good standing to take responsibility for a banned user's reverted edits, I've restored that material to the page. Sarah 13:18, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:Vocal technique.ogg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Vocal technique.ogg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Rodhullandemu 01:28, 6 July 2010 (UTC)