User talk:Nnp

Welcome!

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

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! — TheKMan^talk 08:57, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi !! Hope this is better then the standard welcome you got that you didn't like. --Scott Grayban 16:46, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :)

It wasn't that I didn't like it, it was just an impulse. It may have seemed impolite, which would be unintentional as I try not to be rude (most of the time) :)

I hope Mel Etitis sees that he should apply common sense to the Jameswatt issue. He should ask himself if he thinks the edits were done in good faith. If you google for worldofbiography you'll see lots of evidence of SEO attempts for the domain. Oh well... --Nnp 18:04, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt it. He is stuck on the Wikipedia guidelines that say its ok to ask for link postings on talk pages even though they are clearly spam links. --Scott Grayban 18:31, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

dendrophilia

No reputable references from normal sexology authors. I browsed several thousand webpages to find a minimal derefence to something remotely serious about such kind of paraphilia. Please see my comment in talk:dendrophilia. `'mikka (t) 22:55, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agratek link in Security

Please actually go to http www agratek dot biz before making decisions. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.166.48.219 (talk • contribs • username • real talk page) 20:20, 21 April 2006 UTC.

It's pretty obvious linkspam. You know it and I know it, and because of that I'm going to remove it. If you own the site and feel that information on it could be useful to Wikipedia you could presumably contribute it to Security instead of spamming the link in the middle of the text. --Nnp 20:36, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you an administrater? If not, get a life. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.166.48.219 (talk • contribs) .

No, I'm not an admin. Do yourself a favor and buy some adwords instead of spamming wikipedia. --Nnp 01:14, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the website hoster. It's obviously not a spam link because it is not trying to blaringly sell something and the patent is actually in the patient data base, I suggest you go look up the patent yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.166.48.219 (talk • contribs)

Please correct me if I am wrong, but how is http www agratek dot biz a spam page just because it's outside of Wikipedia? Many other wiki pages have many links to outside links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.166.48.219 (talk • contribs)

There are many useful sites on the net that aren't wikipedia. Please tell me why yours is one of them and why you're so determined to have it in the middle of the security article with text encouracing users to "check this cool new concept"? Even if the site was of interest and notability, the link should not be worded like that.
I'm not the only one reverting your link, why do you think that is? --Nnp 08:06, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wolfie001

Hi, I'm the guy who censored the word in that article. IP: 68.83.165.247. I'm sorry if I broke the rules or anything. However, I would like to say that students of young ages, such as myself, use wikipedia for projects and such. Should Wikipedia be censored? Why not? What is the deteriorating effects? I don't mean to yell at you, but, I dunno, just saying, I guess. No one wants to see curses on a great site like Wikipedia. Actually, just curious, who does? Again, just expelling anger, not really. Anyway, thanx for fixing my mistake. Hope we talk again. -Wolfie001 20:31, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nader "vandalism"

Just an FYI, 69.115.23.71 (talk · contribs) can be a tricky editor to deal with... ([[1]]). You might want to tread lightly. Paul^C/_T+ 02:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removing links

hi , Can I know why you are removing the links ? Can you provide the members with easier explanation of the tutorials ? Alhoori 21:50, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"And a mass insertion campaign seems overly self-promotional and will probably be picked up as spam" , should I mix cooking , exams , gre , toefl , programming in 1 link ? HAND Alhoori 00:07, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

wtf

why'd you revert my stuff?

Intelligent Design Talk

Hello! If you would like to join in a discussion that I noticed you were previously a part of, please head over to here to give us your opinion on the proposed change to the article. I'd appreciate it, thanks! Bagginator 10:56, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Laura DiDio

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Laura DiDio. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laura DiDio. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:09, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]