User talk:P10n3rr

P10n3rr, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi P10n3rr! 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 experienced editors like 78.26 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

September 2020[edit]

xsory i accidetnly worned myself — Preceding unsigned comment added by P10n3rr (talk • contribs) 14:48, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020[edit]

Hello, I'm Valereee. An edit that you recently made to Elizabeth Neumann seemed to be a test. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! —valereee (talk) 12:49, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User warning levels[edit]

Hi, I noticed that you gave a level 1 warning to them when they had already been warned once. It should have been a level 2 warning, since they already had a level -1 template. You might want to look at WP:UWUL. --Ashley yoursmile! 14:25, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

sorrry — Preceding unsigned comment added by P10n3rr (talk • contribs) 13:17, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

funi[edit]

nobody has warned me for my edit on king bach P10n3rr (talk) 14:31, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021[edit]

Hello, I'm Mellk. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks.

It also seems that you consider making disruptive edits funny? Mellk (talk) 15:20, 9 March 2021 (UTC) no i do not you are just a bad wikipedian who warns people for no reason, also that edit was a day ago. AND it's not really disruptive because it was on the bottom of the page. :) P10n3rr (talk) 13:13, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should read WP:VANDALISM carefully because making these silly comments at the bottom of an article (and claiming that you are "just stating a simple fact" in the edit summary) still counts as vandalism, which is disruptive. Not to mention that you made a new section in your talk page after making an edit called "funi" saying "nobody has warned me for my edit on king bach", showing that you are perfectly aware of what you are doing. Continuing with this behaviour will only get you blocked. Mellk (talk) 21:13, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

now its blatant that the only thing you do is sit on your grandmas chair all day and night undoing wikipedia edits. discussion closed. not replying anymore. and it was only 2 edits. couldve undid it when i did it. its the past, stop worrying about problems and worry about your future, not mine.

also british alert

and because im a nice person, i'm sorry i did that, i understand, plessaes do not block me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by P10n3rr (talk • contribs) 13:17, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to comment on WP talk pages, you need to WP:INDENT your posts, be mindful of WP:NPA (due to the blatant insults you've added here) and you need to WP:SIGN your posts. - wolf 17:26, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Yurila (March 20)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by KylieTastic were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Yurila and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Yurila, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 20:25, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Yurila[edit]

Hello, P10n3rr. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Yurila, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occurred, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:02, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023[edit]

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Ryan Fournier. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. "allegedly, with high faith"?? Drmies (talk) 13:39, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

testimony pal P10n3rr (talk) 20:43, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]