User talk:Greenkween

Deleteriously narrow definition of blackface

Hi, I don't know where you are based but many black artists in America are working with blackface as a provocation and an idea. Rather than edit all of my recent entries -- all of which were cited accurately -- we might expand the article lead to encompass work by these artists. I'll try an edit now. Donellew (talk) 23:51, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

lol again

Please refrain from anti-semitism

Wikipedia is not a place to voice your hatred for Jews. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:901:203:DCE0:3DBC:F7B6:154:DFAE (talk) 21:58, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

lol what

Please refrain from grudge matches

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Ryder_Ripps. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you.

Your edits violated several of Wikipedias policies please refrain from using Wikipedia to attack people :

lol

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks Do not make personal attacks anywhere on Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#BATTLE Wikipedia is not a place to hold grudges, import personal conflicts, carry on ideological battles

October 2014

Hello. I noticed that you attempted to file a deletion discussion (on the article Maryam Davari) but did not complete the process. Please note that, when listing an article for deletion, a discussion page needs to be made for other users to discuss whether to keep or delete the article. This is typically done by following the steps listed here. Note that if you are editing as an unregistered user, you cannot create a discussion page. Please consider registering an account or asking another user to help you complete the process at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion. Thank you. ansh666 07:01, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I actually removed the AFD tag before seeing this note. If you'd like, post your rationale on my talk page, or here, and I'll complete the steps on your behalf. Otherwise, you can post your rationale at WT:AFD and someone there will take care of it. The issue here is that I could create the debate, indicate that you nominated the article, and post it to the deletion log - but I can't guess why you believe this article should be deleted. You tagged it for notability a few minutes before tagging it for deletion, so I'm betting that's the reason, but "Notability" is not a deletion rationale, and editors would (correctly) recommend that the debate be closed in the absence of anything more. So have a look, and let me know if I can help with the AFD process. Thanks, UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 12:43, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Nicole Eisenman, Foghorn Hits the Road, 2007, Oil on canvas, 14" x 10 ¾".jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Nicole Eisenman, Foghorn Hits the Road, 2007, Oil on canvas, 14" x 10 ¾".jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 04:14, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Nicole Eisenman, Foghorn Hits the Road, 2007, Oil on canvas, 14" x 10 ¾".jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Nicole Eisenman, Foghorn Hits the Road, 2007, Oil on canvas, 14" x 10 ¾".jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Mlpearc (open channel) 19:50, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An email has been sent by the copyright owner to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Is this sufficient? Thanks, Cherifa2 5:57, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:K8 Hardy 2014.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:K8 Hardy 2014.jpeg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 1Veertje (talk) 12:51, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Matt Wolf (filmmaker), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arthur Russell (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of discretionary sanctions

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Complementary and Alternative Medicine, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Template:Z33 Jytdog (talk) 03:49, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2018

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Cupping therapy. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Blackguard 20:07, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Cupping therapy shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Blackguard 20:13, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]