Welcome!

Hello, Dibol, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Jachin 03:49, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Diabol, but there is still some more work needed especially Mara Aramov, Edward Benton, Thomas Markinson, PHARCOM, Jonathan Phagan. --SGCommand (talk • contribs) 13:51, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will do what I can to update those profiles. I apologize for the inconvenience.

Dibol

I have nominated an article you created, James 'Jamie' Smith, for deletion. You may want to take part in the discussion. Leithp 08:52, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Ali Hillis requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

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. JD554 (talk) 09:18, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from changing the original title of the c't article "Jede dritte stirbt den Hitzetod" to something different. The original title/quotation is perfectly sound German, there is no need to change it at all, and changing it does not only slightly alter the meaning, but is also wrong because the original is the actual title of the c't article. Please read the discussion page Talk:Xbox 360 technical problems Mahjongg (talk) 19:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Ali Hillis, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Ali Hillis. JD554 (talk) 19:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not re add any info regarding chracters fates in the "characters" section. We have decided that the fates should be included in the plot not the "character" section. BonesBrigade 21:50, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DO NOT re-add that griggs is killed. We have REACHED consensus that his fate is unknown. If you want it to change wait for a decision on the TALK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BonesBrigade (talk • contribs) 23:36, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You just violated the Three Revert Rule on the CoD 4 page. I would recommend that you un-revert the change pretty soon. Everyone else on the talk page has reached consensus. Why do you insist on violating policy? SirBob42 (talk) 23:52, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for complying. The newest edit you contributed suits the article perfectly.GraMicE (talk) 06:49, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded to your report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Please read the information there and in the links. Cheers, — Scientizzle 00:28, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think we both got the wrong edit :) [1].--Ѕandahl 05:21, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Read Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. 8bitJoystick is a blog, and thus is an unreliable source. Since the source of the interview is an "anonymous insider", there's also no way to verify any of his statements in his interview, so we have no idea if those statements, or even the assertion that he's an 'insider' at Microsoft, are even true. It's irresponsible to be putting up such vague and unreliable articles as soruces for the article, and it should be removed. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 23:08, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thank you! The user has received no warnings. Rjd0060 (talk) 04:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have already given you a 3RR, yet you decided to continue and edit without resorting to a discussion. This will be your last warning and after that I will report you, it's as simple as that. For the last time, your book is wrong. It's just a book. It's not the end all be all of astrological compatibility charts or comparisons. I've had books claim that Rats and Horse can make it 50-50 (which would mean a 2/4 on the scale in your book). Don't be so naive. Compatibility is based on more things then just the core signs. First there are 4 trines (Rat-Dragon-Monkey), (Ox-Snake-Rooster), etc etc. Then each trine corresponds well with another. For example, the First trine (rat, dragon, monkey) have a special relationship with the second trine (ox, snake, rooster). Kind of like an alliance, they mesh well and they have similar interests, goals, and do things similarily. The core word for the 6 tier alliance (rat-dragon-monkey-ox-snake-rooster) is POWER. The same goes for the third trine (tiger, horse, dog) and the last trine (rabbit, sheep, pig). They have a bond and an alliance and again their interests, goals and ambitions are similar to each other. It's a lot more complicated then what you think and to lower it to a mere scale out of 4 from some book is naive or ignorant at best. I have been an astrologer for the past 24 years, I think I know a thing or two about this. Veronica 14 February, 2008 6:30 (UTC)

Could have put up a disclaimer about being an astrologer in the first place instead of coming down to the mess you placed me in. Dibol (talk) 09:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, you seem to be teetering on the 3RR with your reversions of the spinoff thing. If the editor makes the change again it would probably be best to let another editor revert it. I agree with your position on there so I'll keep an eye out for the change and make the revert if it happens again.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 19:07, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I already have been quite lenient with you, warning you several times. I took out all compatibilities from the sign articles, if I see it up again, I will report you for vandalism and 3RR. Your edits are destructive and the vast majority are grossly inaccurate. You base your edits on a few sites and a book, that is not astrology, that is a hobby. If this is your hobby, please learn a few things and then start making constructive edits. User:VeronicaPR