User talk:Danielhill1990

March 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Hill, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Taroaldo (talk) 06:24, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Wikipedia. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Beach drifter (talk) 06:46, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. Continuing to remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia without resolving the problem that the template refers to may be considered vandalism. Further edits of this type may result in your being blocked from editing. Beach drifter (talk) 06:51, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not assume ownership of articles. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you. Beach drifter (talk) 06:51, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
If you again remove maintenance templates from Wikipedia articles, as you did to Daniel Hill (Footballer), without resolving the problem that the template refers to, you will be blocked from editing. Taroaldo (talk) 06:53, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You are going to have to fix the issues that are addressed by the tags that I have placed on your page, removing them over and over will get you know where. Everyone sees immediately any edits that you make, and it's very easy to undo them. The tags are there for you to know what to improve, rather than your page just being deleted since it is not sourced. Unverified claims can be removed at anytime, and right now that is your entire article. Good luck. Beach drifter (talk) 07:00, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Hill[edit]

My apologies for rolling back your edit, I didn't realise you were the only contributor to the article. If you wish it to be removed from wikipedia, you simply have to blank it again and then I can tag ut as a creator requesting deletion and it will be deleted quickly. I Grave Rob_§talk♥^stalk§ 07:24, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason you can't leave the tags up while you make improvements. Consider the tags guides to follow to make you article meet wikipedia standards and thus not get deleted. Beach drifter (talk) 08:13, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The tags can stay there forever, there is no time limit for you to fix the problems. As I said earlier, though, since you have no sources your article could be deleted at anytime. Beach drifter (talk) 08:19, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Danielhill1990. You have new messages at Taroaldo's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

April 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page 2009 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. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 07:32, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone please explain to me why Jimbo Wales pops out of the side of the screen on this page? It's incredibly freaky and I can't find any other page where this is occurring. Beach drifter (talk) 06:01, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UL Lafayette Ragin' Cajuns Football[edit]

{{Infobox NCAA football school |CurrentSeason=2010 UL Lafayette Ragin' Cajuns Football | TeamName = UL Lafayette Ragin' Cajuns Football | Image = | ImageSize = | Helmet = | HelmetSize = | HeadCoachDisplay = Ricky Bustle | HeadCoachLink = Ricky Bustle | HeadCoachYear = 9th | HCWins = 17 | HCLosses = 29 | HCTies = | Stadium = Cajun Field (ULL) | StadCapacity = 31,000 | StadSurface = Grass | Location = Lafayette, Louisiana | ConferenceDisplay= Sun Belt Conference (1991 - present) | ConferenceLink = Sun Belt Conference | FirstYear = 1901 | AthlDirectorDisp = David Walker | AthlDirectorLink = David Walker | WebsiteName = ragincajuns.com | WebsiteURL = http://www.ragincajuns.com | ATWins = 478 | ATLosses = 503 | ATTies = 35 | ATPercentage = .505 | BowlWins = 1 | BowlLosses = 1 | BowlTies = 0 | NatlTitles = 0 | ConfTitles = 6 | Heismans = 0 | All-Conference = 110 | uniform = | Color1 = Vermillion | Color1Hex = #E34234 | Color2 = White | Color2Hex = #FFFFFF | FightSong = Fight on, Cajuns! | MascotDisplay = | MascotLink = | MarchingBand = Pride of Acadiana | PagFreeLabel = Rival | PagFreeValue =UL Monroe War Hawks
Louisiana Tech Bulldogs
Troy State Trojans

Conference championships[edit]

ULL has won a total of 6Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).</ref> conference championships in three different conferences. Since becoming a member of the Sun Belt Conference (Sun Belt) in 1991, ULL has won two conference title, being Co-Champions in 2005 and 2009.

Bowl games[edit]

Year	Bowl Game	Winner	Loser	Record
1944	Oil Bowl	Louisiana 24	Arkansas A&M 7	5-0-1
1970	Rice Bowl	Tennessee State 26	Louisiana 25	9-3

Protocols of the Elders of Zion[edit]

Did you even read the article, where the evidence of its falsehood is clear? There is not even any point in arguing that point. Corvus cornix_talk 08:42, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Only warning[edit]

Discuss your edits to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion on the article's Talk page. The article clearly indicates where the falsehoods come from, and your edits removing such claims fly in the face of decades of research and clear evidence. You cannot make up claims out of whole cloth. If you revert again, you'll be dragged before admins for vandalism Corvus cornix_talk 08:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Danielhill1990_and_The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion Corvus cornix_talk 08:58, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 08:57, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

January 2011[edit]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for removing properly sourced content in order to push your point of view, edit warring, and logging out to continue to edit war from your ip address, now also blocked. Do any of these things again and you will likely be blocked indefinitely.. Once the block has expired, you're welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:52, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]