User talk:Infallibleflyingzombie

A tag has been placed on Katy Johnson, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per speedy deletion criterion G10.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.Toddst1 00:55, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit needs support from some reliable sources. The article relies heavily on citations to sources, since it is about a controversy, and most unsupported additions fail to survive scrutiny. For your recent edit to Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy, can you bring in some reliable sources for the claim? Here is the edit.
-- Yellowdesk (talk) 20:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since your added text will lack a citation to some source for 14 days as of January 1st, I propose to remove the claim then, for lack of support. Your citation to sources supporting the statement is invited.-- Yellowdesk (talk) 00:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism and are immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. ----Ðysepsion † ^{Speak your mind} 01:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Alan Keyes, but we regretfully cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. You also referenced additional information that was not mentioned in the source material. This misrepresentation also falls under the category of original research and it should always be avoided on Wikipedia. In particular, biographies of living persons have very scrutinous guidelines that all information must be follow for inclusion. Please read Wikipedia: Biographies of Living Persons. Thank you. --Jdcaust (talk) 01:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to United States presidential election, 2008, you will be blocked from editing. The Evil Spartan (talk) 01:09, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When adding links to material on an external site, as you did to Kent Hovind, please ensure that the external site is not violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If you believe the linked site is not violating copyright with respect to the material, then you should do one of the following:

• If the linked site is the copyright holder, leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page;
• If a note on the linked site credibly claims permission to host the material, or a note on the copyright holder's site grants such permission, leave a note on the article Talk page with a link to where we can find that note;
• If you are the copyright holder or the external site administrator, adjust the linked site to indicate permission as above and leave a note on the article Talk page;

If the material is available on a different site that satisfies one of the above conditions, link to that site instead. NeilN ^{talk to me} 22:16, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]