User talk:204.26.30.8

Joe Rogan

Hello sir. Your IP address (along with the ones used in previous edits) would indicate you're the same gentleman from Chicago who keeps reverting the edits to Rogan's listing in the list of notable practitioners. Again, while I certainly respect your obvious passion for 10th Planet, I won't support it appearing as a bright-line distinction from BJJ as an art unless consensus is reached which approves of that. Personally, as you obviously know by now, I think that 10th Planet JJ is a "non-traditional style of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu" as suggested in the 10th Planet article. At any rate, I've started inquiring with others as to whether your edit suggestion may be the correct one. If I'm wrong about this you'll certainly get a full apology from me. And even though you probably won't, please let me know your thoughts on this. Cheers, Buddy23Lee (talk) 18:01, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

See, and I can agree to that (your latest edit regarding this). I think it's a pretty good compromise. It suggests that 10th Planet JJ is a particular style of BJJ but doesn't create the somewhat confusing idea that it might be a completely separate art from BJJ. Nice work and happy training my friend. Buddy23Lee (talk) 20:45, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

D&D creatures

I noticed you started creating several articles about Dungeons & Dragons creatures (actually, transforming redirects into articles, redirects that I have restored on recent articles you edited). If you didn't already know about it, Wikipedia's notability guidelines require for topics to be covered in multiple reliable, secondary independent sources in order to justify stand-alone articles. The articles you have created only contain references from primary content by TSR, Inc. or Wizards of the Coast and thus cannot be seen as notable enough. The users managing D&D articles already have a lot of work to do and in order for them not to waste time on countless non-notable articles, redirects on D&D creatures should remain redirects, and I urge to pay attention to notability issues in your future edits. Thank you.Folken de Fanel (talk) 11:18, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for reverting your recent experiment with the page Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead, as someone could see your test before you revert it. Thank you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:27, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

March 2017

Hello, I'm Topcipher. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Republic of Texas— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. TopCipher (talk) 15:28, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

January 2019

Hello, I'm Shellwood. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Charlamagne tha God— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. Shellwood (talk) 12:10, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Dretch (Dungeons & Dragons)

The article Dretch (Dungeons & Dragons) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TTN (talk) 12:03, 14 January 2020 (UTC) {{safesubst:#if:|== Proposed deletion of Deva (Dungeons & Dragons) ==| TTN (talk) 17:15, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Dao (Dungeons & Dragons)

The article Dao (Dungeons & Dragons) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TTN (talk) 19:11, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Hey all, I believe my IP may have been hacked or used by another computer. The only edits I have personally made have been related to music and history. Please help me figure this out.

Proposed deletion of Arcanaloth

The article Arcanaloth has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TTN (talk) 12:07, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

---