User talk:Rosenkreutzer

Talk page discussions[edit]

Thanks for notifying me of that. It just seems that when IP's are editing pages they need to include in the edit summary 'per discussion' or 'per talk page'. If they don't and something that seems weird appears on the article, that might mean to revert it. I'll try to look out next time. Red Director 17:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Atmos (musician)[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Atmos (musician) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. ttonyb (talk) 21:38, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do not recreate articles that have been deleted. Go to deletion review if you think it should be restored. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:43, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

June 2019[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Kombucha. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Alexbrn (talk) 02:45, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop[edit]

Please stop trying to edit war unsourced content into Julian Assange. Note that you need to provide a source for any controversial addition you make when you make it, in the article text, not in a later edit summary. Note also that a Wikipedia article is not a reliable source (because Wikipedia is a wiki). Finally, I can't even see that the Wikipedia article you invoke in your edit summary, July 12, 2007, Baghdad airstrike, tends to support your claim. Bishonen | talk 04:33, 14 July 2019 (UTC).[reply]

Hello Bishonen - should I address this issue (concerning armed insurgents within the group targeted by US helicopters on the 'Collateral Murder' video) on the Julian Assange talk page? I don't see that it's a controversial addition - with regards to the Wikipedia article I cited (airstrike of 12 July 2007), the second paragraph states: "In the first strike, the crews of two Apaches directed 30 mm cannon fire at a group of ten Iraqi men, including some armed men, standing where insurgents earlier that day had shot at an American Humvee with small arms fire. Among the group were two Iraqi war correspondents working for Reuters, Saeed Chmagh and Namir Noor-Eldeen." And again here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_12,_2007,_Baghdad_airstrike#Attack_on_personnel where you can follow the references used to support the claim (principally the redacted military report 'Investigation into Civilian Casualties Resulting from an Engagement on 12 July 2007 in the New Baghdad District of Baghdad, Iraq'). Rosenkreutzer (talk) 10:07, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Answered on my page. Bishonen | talk 12:01, 14 July 2019 (UTC).[reply]

Important message[edit]

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 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may impose sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—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 these sanctions. 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.

—Paleo Neonate – 05:31, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]