After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback can be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback may be removed at any time.

If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Happy editing! Tiptoety ^talk 21:23, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for recently reverting vandalism to my User page.--Rockfang (talk) 22:05, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain to me why you templated my talk page for a 3 year old AFC-created article that clearly does not fall under G12? In addition, could you please explain why you templated my talk page but did NOT actually speedy the article? -- ShinmaWa^(talk) 17:41, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did template the article, but some else edited out, or reverted back to a pre copyright issue version. An admin deleted out the revions that had copyrighted material on them. I tagged it with twinkle, and since you created the page, it sent you a message. The material that was deleted was copied directly from the Engineers Australia website. After I tagged the page, I read some more on how to handle copyright problems, and realize that I should have handle the way listed under "Alternatives to deletion" at WP:CP. Click23 (talk) 22:00, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Click 23.

I have noticed that your last entry on the ThreePeace Watchlist page says (Fixed Citations) But the page is no longer visable? Can you help me with this. There is no further information. But the page is no longer visable by search, but does appear in a search down on the page and then is redirected to the page. Best to you.Riddiman (talk) 22:27, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Still shows up for me ThreePeace. I would be great if you find more info on the from mainstream sources. What you have is a good start though. Click23 (talk) 22:46, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. That is strange because I still cannot find it. I will write you in a few days if it doesn't show up again. Just so I understand correctly if you type ThreePeace in the Search on Wikipedia.Com or Wikipedia.Org it is still visable? Maybe I need some sleep. LOL. Have learned alot this weekend about all of this. Hope to learn more about how to publish a photo. I refrained from adding one after reading the photo guidelines.Best.Riddiman (talk) 22:55, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can click the link here : ThreePeace. That should take you right to it. Click23 (talk) 11:11, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Click, Apparently I was having a problem with post data from my browser. I can see it fine now. ThanksRiddiman (talk) 12:26, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your check about the Garrick theatre page. I'm sorry if I've broken a rule here - I work at the Garrick theatre and I noticed the section entitled "Controversy" when I logged in earlier. While I appreciate people are entitled to their opinion the section seemed more to encourage people to visit an external website focused on slurs against the theatre and its running. I found the section was overly bias and thus chose to remove it. Again, apologies if I acted incorrectly. Lichfield Garrick (talk) 13:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)Lichfield GarrickLichfield Garrick (talk) 13:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if anything can be done about this. Please read the Comments on the ThreePeace page. Hairhorn is Trying to delete ThreePeace as non-notable. Speaking for countless thousands of fans we certainly disagree. Please read the aritcle deletion post comments. I have other sources I am working on and would appreciate your comments.Riddiman (talk) 20:38, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Click23, We have worked a little on the article to improve it. But we have problems with the positioning of the box at the top. In the German Wikipedia we have it on the right side, but we do not manage to get it there in the English Wikipedia. It seems to be glued to the left side. Any idea? Thanks, --Edgar Meyer (talk) 14:42, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Click23, The problem with the box was solved by a czech wikipedian. As we have improved the article a little more by now, we would like to know if we can take out morefootnotes, refimprove and wikify? Regards, --Edgar Meyer (talk) 21:47, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been vastly improved. I just removed the wikify tag, but the others still need to stay. The article needs inline citations. Take a look here, Tech Tower. Everything in that article is backed up with referenced material, see all of the superscript numbers and the "References" section at the bottom. For info on how to do this see WP:CITE. Click23 (talk) 13:19, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a few more citations are needed for some claims that are not supported. After they are added, along with a bit of copy editing, it will be ready to be a B rated article, WP:GER/A. And after that it would just needed to be nominated as a Good Article and go through that process. I can help out a bit with copy editing, but that is not one of my strong points. Keep up the good work. Click23 (talk) 21:03, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, Click23, I'll try to do my very best - though it's not easy in a foreign language. So any help is cordially welcome! Regards, --Edgar Meyer (talk) 06:29, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you have done a lot of work on this article. There are a few sections that are not fully referenced and cited. Once those two things are done I will change it to B-Class, and submit it for GA rating. Click23 (talk) 16:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reminder! I have worked a little more on it - so I hope you will like it. Best regards, --Edgar Meyer (talk) 01:02, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Click23, just saw that you are back in town. Can you do me a favor and have a look at my article. Are the references and citations OK now? Best regards, --Edgar Meyer (talk) 11:13, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tweaked one sentence, but other than that it looks good. I have nominated it as a good article

There was absolutely nothing in the article you tagged for speedy deletion that would have made you think the individual had any notability; it's just that I happened to be familiar with the fact that she starred in a bunch of episodes of Columbo, among other things. All such information is totally missing from the article, so I'll have to look some things up and add them... I just wanted you to know that I didn't remove your speedy tag idly, and I recognize that you didn't place it idly eiither (from what I saw, you were quite correct to do so). If you have any questions or comments, I'm at your service. Accounting4Taste:talk 21:48, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Click23. Just wanted to let you know that I declined the speedy on this one. [1] After a check for sources, he appears to be a notable soap opera actor. Regards, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 23:33, 17 September 2009 (UTC) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________[reply]

Hi Click 23, I found my self a little bit indisposed soon as I started the above quoted article and had to abandon it. The article is now finished and ready to go; when I logged on, it had been tagged for deletion and been actually deleted now. I am relatively new to the Wiki community. Most terms are unknown to untill your recent message. Now, help me to get the article into the Wikipedia Seskolbel (talk) 09:19, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you contact the admin that deleted it, he should be able to restore it for you. If you have all of the information you can just recreate it. Click23 (talk) 13:02, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey–Kurdistan Workers' Party conflict need to be reverted further but I cannot sort it out. --Alchemist Jack (talk) 15:23, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

looks like zzuuzz took care of it. Click23 (talk) 15:29, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks anyway for the help. --Alchemist Jack (talk) 17:41, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Henry Ford has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you.  Chzz  ►  13:56, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you must have been reverting the vandilsim with Huggle at the same time I was, and clicked "revert and warn" just after I did. See this diff, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Henry_Ford&diff=316124233&oldid=316124197. Click23 (talk) 14:08, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that's exactly what happened, sorry. Thanks for understanding, keep up the good work.  Chzz  ►  14:13, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Click, will you please remove that notice of yours from my talk page; I have nothing to do with the article in question. Apcbg (talk) 22:07, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a friendly note on Rick Pierchalski. I declined the speedy deletion request because there are good faith claims of importance in the article. In fact, there are even claims of notability, given the reference of the newspaper story about him. If you think WP:Notability can't be satisfied, feel free to take it to AfD. Cheers! --Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:25, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have done an editor review for you at Wikipedia:Editor review/Click23. Sorry for the delay in getting one done - we are slowly catching up with the backlog!

Perhaps you could consider doing a review of another editor? It takes a bit of time (reviews can take anywhere from about 30 minutes up to 2 hours, depending on how many contributions the editor has made, where they have contributed, etc).

The ones marked with a * are those editors who have not been reviewed yet - if you want to review one of these, make sure you remove the asterisks in the parts indicated!

If you have not done a review before, you might feel more comfortable giving a second review to an editor - this will show you an example of a review that has been done, and show you the kinds of things that can be commented on.

I hope that you find the review useful. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about it.

Regards, -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 15:48, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have deleted User talk:Click23/sandbox as per your request. Considering you blanked the page, do you also want me to delete User:Click23/sandbox? SchuminWeb (Talk) 17:14, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will keep the [[User:Click23/sandbox] I will use it from time to time. Just wanted to have the one under my talk page deleted because it should have been under my userpage. Click23 (talk) 17:49, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding [2] I think you meant to sign this. JoshuaZ (talk) 18:57, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the article is sufficiently changed as to no longer warrant a "close paraphrase" tag. There are only so many ways to present limited biographical information.

As to the format, education, medical career, his work as an author and his appearance on radio and television. Although it repeats the same order on his website, it seems to be the logical progressive order. I don't believe that any sentences are repeated exactly. If I'm wrong let me know. I appreciate it.7mike5000 (talk) 09:31, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this notice as an active member of WikiProject Scouting. To change your status as a member, please edit Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting/Members.

Rlevse is retiring as our lead coordinator; see Stepping down as ScoutingWikiProject Lead Coordinator. Election for a new coordinator will be held after the new year. If you are interested in nominating yourself or another editor, please add the name to Project coordinator election.

Yours in Scouting
---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 16:09, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm one of those annoying sysops who monitor wannabees' pages. When you think, or another sysop thinks, that you are ready, contact me. Bearian (talk) 21:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the offer. I just had an editor review done, and I am working on the suggestions mentioned there. Maybe one day, but for now I know I am just not ready . Click23 (talk) 22:30, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I received two messages from you (probably from an automatic system that is in place) regarding two uploaded images that are currently "orphaned". I just wanted to ask you to please not delete them, as I am building the article for them in my userspace.

You can view it here: User:NeoGenPT/Formula_One_(1985_video_game)

I'm new at wikipedia, still learning how things work, but I think the article is coming along well. I'll have it ready for reviewing soon. Thanks! NeoGenPT (talk) 22:24, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an admin, so I cannot delete them. The files will not be deleted until 12/14/09, so you have time to finish your article, and move it to mainspace. Click23 (talk) 22:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a friendly note on Stone River. I did decline the speedy because of some weak claims of importance in the article plus the talk page claims, however, I'll be dog gonned if I can find refs to back any of them up. Best I got was this (warning, music starts to play) from the CBC, quoting an undated Toronto Star article that I couldn't track down in a search. Band isn't listed on allmusic, and I'm not familiar with sources for Canadian charts.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After I saw that talk page I added a hangon, decided not to deleted the speedy that I had put up because the real claim to notability was on the talk page. Hopefully she can come up with some references. Click23 (talk) 22:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Click23. As I was dealing with vandalism today I came across a user whom posted a phone number to Wikipedia. After checking the contributions of the user, I noticed you had reverted such a problem earlier in the day (about 2 hours earlier). I just wanted to let you know that typically phone numbers should be hidden permanently from Wikipedia to protect privacy. Reverting removes the phone number from the current page, but doesn't strip it from the history. I've gone to the appropriate people to get those two revisions stricken from the records. In the future, if you wouldn't mind, if you happen to see vandalism that contains personal information such as phone numbers or addresses, you should head over to requests for oversight to request that the revision be removed. Thanks for your hard work, and please feel free to let me know if you have any questions or comments. --Shirik (talk) 18:09, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For this obviously stationary IP who has periodically vandalised this BLP (among others) for over a year now, you left progressively nicer warnings, the first rightfully telling him he can be blocked for vandalising a BLP. He should have been blocked the last time he did this. At least if the warnings were in reverse, I could take it to AIV, but since the welcome was the last notice, I don't think it would have been accepted. So I gave him another final warning. We shouldn't give more good faith the more he vandalises. That makes us look like we aren't paying attention, which is what vandals count on. Just wished to share my concerns, Auntie E. 20:07, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The first warning was for the blatant vandalism of Ben Stein. I added the Ben Stein page to my watchlist, and the next day I was looking back at what user:88.114.97.44 had done, and noticed his edit summary of "fixed a typo" for the vandalism. So the second warning you see is actually for inappropriate edit summary, not for additional vandalism. Click23 (talk) 14:00, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Some people say I am a music and a book encyclopedia myself, going way back my mom always loved music.I began reding novels by Victoria Holt, Phyllis gerorge, T.H. White, and JRR Tolkien and so on when I was in the 3rd grade maybe sooner. I was raised on everything from Elvis and Ray Charles to Conway Twitty, Charlie Pride, Dolly amd Loretta and the Byrds, Rolling Stones, well you get the idea.I also can name an artist usually by voice, and authors by style and genre. I intent to get into alot more, so I need all the help I can get.

                                                                                  Thanks for listening  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tijerasmanzano (talk • contribs) 04:36, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply] 

Thank you for protecting the Derek Dooley page. I made an admittedly feeble attempt to clean it and was attempting to send a page protection request, but was having trouble. I wanted to make sure you knew I was trying to restore the page and not vandalize it. But I think, from your message, that you knew that. Thank you very much! Cca72 (talk) 19:05, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have not actually protected it, admins do that and I am not one. What I have done it submitted it to the admins for protection, if they think it needs protection they will set it that way. As of this message it is not protected. Once it is, you will see a lock on the top right of the page. Keep up the good work! Click23 (talk) 19:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I removed the speedy deletion template from the article because according to Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion schools are not eligible under this criteria. Sincerely, --PinkBull 17:52, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason I thought that it had been changed to include them. Click23 (talk) 18:11, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We have been trying to get in contact with anyone who can shed some light as to what we need to do to get our page back up

We have been siting hear all day (since 6 A:M) this morning trying to figure out why guys deleted our page and what we need to do to get it back up (What do you people want from us!)

Or page has been on the Wikipedia site for years with out any trouble and out of the blue you guys trash it!?? At the vary least make it easy and straight forward process for us to appeal our deletion. Why were we not sent an email stating that our page did not follow follow some criteria and that if we did not correct it our page would be deleted? All of our contact info is on file sending us a messages would have saved us a lot of pain

We donate money to Wikipedia frequently because we brilliant idea. we really don't understand why we are being treated this way?

Please tell us what do you want from us so that we can resolve this?!!

Thank you

Staff

(DORIANQUEST 03:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC))

Hoodywood Records —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorianquest (talk • contribs) 03:16, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You put a PRODBLP template on Leif Ourston. However, there is a link in the article to the source of its content (http://www.ourston.com/index.php?id=114). This is a reference, even though it is not formatted in standard Wikipedia reference style, so I have declined the PRODBLP. However, the subject does not seem to have a great deal of notability, so you may like to take it to AfD. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:02, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Click23! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

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) 13:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Click23,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

1. Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
2. Editor-focused central editing dashboard
3. "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
4. Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
5. Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:09, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]