User talk:Ghfkghdkfhsk

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bill Hagan Deletion[edit]

09/26/2011

This article has been fully revise. Please vote not to delete this article and remove tag for deletion after the seven day review has passed. I have worked very hard on this article and am open to more suggestions. While some members simply appear to have vandalised my writing other have been wonderful. It is just like life. Thank you to all that helped me improve this important article on Western New York Politics Signed: Ghfkghdkfhsk

== I believe I have corrected all issues. - ghfkghkfhsk Thanks Jeff, I weill email you. I hope I am improving the article so I can move on to my next New York Ploitical article. Thank you for all the help.

Messages[edit]

I am not getting mesages, does wiki have email. Please Help.

Yes, please see Special:EmailUser/Jeff G. for an example, and if you need general help, just use {{helpme}}.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 00:15, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vejvančický I have update my references.


Guy I need advice. Please review my Bill Hagan article so it meets standards. I don't want to break the rules. I just like to write about politcs. Welcome!

Hello, Ghfkghdkfhsk, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other 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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 07:51, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Bill Hagan[edit]

From: GhfkghdkfhskGhfkghdkfhsk (talk) 15:33, 25 September 2011 (UTC) With the help of other wiki user with more experience I have update and corrected the mistakes in the article on [Bill Hagan]] He is a notible person as a review of his wiki will show. Thank you for your help and futher suggestions as I improve this article. You all had to learn how to use wiki at one point. Please remove call for deletion of this article on Bill Hagan[reply]

Thank you

-End-

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

Not a notable person, no reliable sources supporting the claims in the article. The Buffalo News article doesn't mention Bill Hagan or William John Hagan (which is a deleted duplicate of this article).

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 07:27, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aticle has been corrected fully- Ghfkghdkfhsk

Proposed deletion of Dr. Jeffery Maxon[edit]

The article Dr. Jeffery Maxon has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not a notable person, no reliable sources supporting the claims in the article. Also an unreferenced biography of a living person.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 07:51, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

September 2011[edit]

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you.

Hello Ghfkghdkfhsk. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

  1. editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
  2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
  3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:57, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Bill Hagan. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. 107.10.43.91 (talk) 16:42, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did know the rules at the time it will never happen again. Thanks Ghfkghdkfhsk - "Stop the vanadlism"

Speedy deletion nomination of Bill Hagan[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Bill Hagan 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 important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:57, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Major correction made to the page of this notable Western New York political figure. Ghfkghdkfhsk

Nomination of Bill Hagan for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bill Hagan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill Hagan until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 14:47, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to remove Articles for deletion notices or comments from articles and Articles for deletion pages, as you did at Bill Hagan, you may be blocked from editing. --Davejohnsan (talk) 16:49, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I made a mistake tag and have never practiced disruptive editing. -Ghfkghdkfhsk

Bill Hagan[edit]

There's no substantial information about the subject in the sources that you have provided, Ghfkghdkfhsk. Please, see this project's notability requirements for people. Thank you. Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 16:56, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here on Wikipedia, you can not write whatever you want, especially when you write about a living person. You have to cite multiple reliable and substantial sources to back up your claims. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 17:11, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article should no longer be subject to deletion as it now meets standards. Thank you for all your help Signed: Ghfkghdkfhsk

I made a mistake tag and have never practiced disruptive editing. -Ghfkghdkfhsk

A little neighborly advice[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Writing new articles can certainly be intimidating if you're unfamiliar with Wikipedia's policies. I'll see if I can point you in some of the right directions.

The Bill Hagan article has been nominated for deletion. That means that any interested Wikipedia users can discuss whether or not the subject of this article is notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia. The discussion is taking place here. Deletion discussions usually last no less than a week, so you have some time to explain why you think this article should stay. I'd suggest you read Wikipedia's policies about notability, especially the section about biographies of living persons. You should also look at Wikipedia's policies about reliable sources. Once you've familiarized yourself with those policies, if you think this article deserves to stay on Wikipedia, you can explain on the article's deletion discussion page why it shouldn't be deleted. You need to be careful, however, not to delete the tag at the top of the page nominating the article for deletion. If, after discussion, the community decided the article should stay, an administrator will remove the tag. In fact, I'd suggest you familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's guide to deletion to understand the process.

Starting to edit on Wikipedia certainly has a learning curve, and reading all those policies can be tedious, but they're there to keep Wikipedia relevant and accurate. Don't be discouraged by the nomination of this article for deletion. It's par for the course, and it helps improve articles.

Finally, a housekeeping note: when you write on the talk page of an article, of another user, or on your own, sign your comments by adding four tildes to the end of the comment (~~~~). This will make it easier to follow the conversation. Thanks, and good luck editing Wikipedia! 107.10.43.91 (talk) 17:25, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    • And also: once an article has been nominated for deletion at AFD, you should not remove the AFD notice. Instead, participate in the AFD discussion and state there why you think the article should be kept. NawlinWiki (talk) 17:45, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all for teaching me the basics. Article is now well sourced and acurate please do not delete. Signed: Ghfkghdkfhsk

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 or 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) 17:39, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. However, I noticed that your username (Ghfkghdkfhsk) may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because it is unpronounceable. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username, or you may simply create a new account to use for editing. Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 00:10, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you remove Articles for deletion notices or comments from articles and Articles for deletion pages as you did with this edit to Bill Hagan.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 00:51, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are 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. Elockid (Talk) 00:57, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources in your article[edit]

Hello Ghfkghdkfhsk. I went through the sources that you provided in your article, and here is my opinion:

I'm sorry, but I don't think it is enough to meet our notability requirements. Your sources say that Hagan is an unsuccessful candidate in the Massachusetts 2002 Election, he worked as spokeman for Mac Collins and David Bellavia, published several articles for various websites/magazines and participated in the World Trade Center Site Memorial Competition. It is in my opinion insufficient to establish notability here on Wikipedia as all we have are unimportant mentions in articles about different subjects or not an independent coverage. The achievements of this person are not significant enough to warrant an article in an encyclopedia. Please, review WP:ANYBIO and familiarize yourself with the basic rules of this project. Thanks for your understanding. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 11:21, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hagan is an editorial writer shall I cite every article he has ever written? Come on Signed: Ghfkghdkfhsk

Welcome[edit]

Welcome!

Hello, Ghfkghdkfhsk, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Ground Zero | t 15:26, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your additions to Bill Hagan[edit]

Hello again. I've checked your most recent additions, and I have to say that my opinion remains unchanged. You've added some pretty bold claims:

YOU misread that section. Much of this is about his family. He is a directed decendant of Catherine of Valois. His cousin is Franco's great grand son.

However, not a single of your claims is verifiable by reliable sources. The references you've added either don't mention Hagan or are unreliable. Honestly, I'm starting to think that this article is a bad joke, given the claims cited above. Any possible kinship with such important and ancient European royal houses would be surely verifiable by many sources. It isn't and I don't believe it is truth. Sorry. Please, respond here or at my talk page. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 16:17, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will remove that section if you disagree but it is a ell know fact.
Yes, please remove that section. Thank you. Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 16:26, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed that section. Please give me any advice or feel free to remove any of my work that you don't feel meets standards. I am trying to learn and have a thick skin. I very much thank you for your help. Do you work for wiki. - Burt

Thank you. Burt, I respect and support your efforts, but you should choose another topic for your work, as this has in my opinion no chance to survive here on Wikipedia. Please, read again the basic rules of editing here on Wikipedia, the notability guidelines, and try to edit in accordance with the rules. Thanks for your understanding. Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 16:39, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Hagan is a major player in New York politics in Western New York. There are far less notible politicans represent on wiki so why not on with power. I have meet him. He is an interesting person. I smiled when you said is this a joke because he is a true noble man in every since of the way. I do want to get this done so I can work on something different however.

The article is being discussed on AfD, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill Hagan. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 16:53, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the link I have posted my response but I want to be a good cummunity member so if you need to delete the article that please do - Burt

Kathy Hochul[edit]

You are committing vandalism, please contact me if you have a problem. I am an expert on WNY politics. Would love to have constructive advice as I am new. Citations added also it is an open fact in New York. - Burt


I have again reverted your edits - despite your citation of sources, this appears to be your own analysis of the importance of Mr. Bellavia's effect on the election, so it's not appropriate per WP:NOR. Also, any such analysis belongs in the article on the election, not on Ms. Hochul. Please be mindful of WP:3RR, also. NawlinWiki (talk) 20:31, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Where to start? (1) Just because you claim to be an expert on New York politics doesn't mean you get to impose your views on multiple articles, see WP:OWN. (2) Multiple people have disagreed with your edits, and you have accused each of them of vandalism. That doesn't indicate a willingness to work collaboratively with others. You really need to take a step back and think about your pattern of editing. NawlinWiki (talk) 20:36, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The information was from the media and is referenced. Signed: Ghfkghdkfhsk

Linking[edit]

Please take a look at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking, especially these sections: WP:OVERLINK and WP:REPEATLINK. This will help you understand when it is appropriate to link and when it is not appropriate. There is no point in linking an article to itself, or in linking to a page that rediects to the articel - you're just sending the reader around in a circle. So in the article on Bill Hagan, don't link "Bill Hagan", or "William John Hagan" if that redirects to "Bill Hagan", although I see it is now a redlink. I hope this helps. Ground Zero | t 21:05, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I now believe this is corrected- Signed: Ghfkghdkfhsk

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 or 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) 21:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Hagan[edit]

Ghfkghdkfhsk, the AfD is still open, you can not close the discussion by removing the template from the article. This project is open to anyone, but it has some rules regarding the content of articles. The articles are discussed in an open forum everyday, and if the consensus is on the 'delete' side, the articles are being deleted. That's reality here on Wikipedia, and you can't change it without good arguments in the discussion. Editors who stubbornly refuse to respect the basic rules of this project are usually blocked. I'll restore the template. Please don't remove it again. Thank you. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 20:07, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for my mistake. I thought after reading it that this foolishness had been resolved. Thank you again for your help with my education. I really appreciate it. Would you mind reading my article on the New York Federalist Party to see if it meets standards. Thanks Burt - Ghfkghdkfhsk

This foolishness had been resolved? The article is 'being solved' at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill Hagan and the result of the discussion will decide about further presence of the article on Wikipedia. You are now the only editor in support of keeping the article. The other participants (eight editors, including me) !voted for deletion of your page. You can find relevant details at the AfD page. The discussion usually lasts one week. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 08:37, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Request[edit]

Please review this improved article and remove the deletion request as this article meets all know wiki standards on notable political and journalist living people. That you to all the wiki users who helped me learn how to edit this page and please review my other creation New York Federalist Party. Thank you for your help. Special thanks Vejvančický to Vejvančický - Burt - Signed User:(talkGhfkghdkfhsk

As for the New York Federalist Party, there's not a single reliable and independent evidence confirming that such a party exists [2]. All we have now are your contributions here on Wikipedia, and it isn't enough. Could you cite any reliable sources? --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 08:37, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are incorrect my friend. It is a registered Party in the State of New York and will be participating in the 2012 elections in New York - Ghfkghdkfhsk

I may be incorrect. Do you have any evidence for your claims? I can tell you that I own and operate from Proxima Centauri and Darth Vader is sitting next to me. Anyone can post almost anything on Internet, but not here on Wikipedia. Here you have to back up your claims with reliable evidence. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 08:58, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also how do you feel about the Bill Hagan article?

I explained my opinion above, and it is still unchanged. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 08:58, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your opinion and help but I must disagree with you. It appears you are on a campaign which is politically motivated rather than in the interest of wiki. Please stop vandalizing my work - Ghfkghdkfhsk

Of course you have the right to disagree with me. I'm not on a politically motivated campaign, I'm sitting somewhere in the Central Europe and my knowledge of New York political parties is similar to my knowledge of snails from the branch of Heterobranchia. However, the existence of those snails is verifiable. The existence of this party isn't. I don't want to vandalize your work, but I'm here to help to keep this project strong and reliable, therefore I must ask you for your sources. Could you cite any? --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 09:18, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Name change[edit]

Hello, as you were warned five days ago, your username is a violation of our username policy because it is a set of random letters. I will refrain from blocking this account for two days so that you can request a change of username. Danger (talk) 09:44, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How do I do that

Hey![edit]

How do I get your attention? I've pointed out to you that it is incorrect to link and article to itself and to link the same things repeatedly in the same article, but you've done it again in the Bill Hagan article. Please stop doing that. You have asked for help in learning how to edit in Wikipedia, so please accept the help that people give you.

As far as your request for a namechange, read change of username and then this page. Since you are a new editor, it may just be easier for you to start a new account and stop using this one. Ground Zero | t 09:58, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest changing names, since this account has well over 200 edits. --Danger (talk) 10:24, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I tryed to and need to but I don't know how to change my user name. I am a Croatian hot head but I am learning the American ways. I am a slow leaner. Sorry to all. - Bust Signed Ghfkghdkfhsk

Follow the instructions here. If you have any questions about the instructions, just ask me. Danger (talk) 11:02, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photos[edit]

You have uploaded a large number of photographs of Bill Hagan, including one from his time in college and many at political events dating back a decade or more.[3] You say that all of these were your own work. You've also uploaded a copy of his 9/11 Memorial project design, also describing it as your own work. The implication is that you are Bill Hagan, or that you have been known him since he was in college and attend the same parties as he does, or that you have incorrectly identified the copyright holders of these images. Could you please clarify your ownership of these images?   Will Beback  talk  11:00, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New York Federalist Party[edit]

I replied to your question at my talk page. I also want to let you know that I plan to nominate for deletion your article on New York Federalist Party, as you haven't provided a single reliable source confirming that the party exists. Here on Wikipedia, you can not write about political intentions of living people without providing a good evidence supporting your claims. Such an unverifiable information could be damaging for their careers and misleading to our readers. Thanks for your understanding. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 11:01, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing and blocking[edit]

Unfortunately there seem to be numerous problems with your editing. Many of them have already been explained to you, and I will not repeat everything that has already been said to you, but there are a few points I would like to emphasise.

  1. You have a habit of accusing other editors of bad faith without evidence. For example, in this edit you accuse another editor of being on a politically motivated campaign, without any evidence that I can see. Also, you have a persistent habit of describing perfectly good-faith edits which you disagree with as "vandalism". Here are a few examples: [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]. Wikipedia works by collaboration and cooperation, and throwing accusations out against other editors in this way creates a hostile atmosphere, which is not conducive to such collaboration.
  2. A large proportion of your edits are reverts of other editors' undoing of your edits. Generally speaking, if you find that your edits are challenged by other editors, then you should not simply restore what you have done. If you really think that there is justification for your actions then you should explain those reasons. You should especially avoid repeatedly making the same edits several times, as you did for example here here and here, which is known as edit warring, and can lead to being blocked from editing. Perhaps also, rather than simply undoing reverts of your edits, you should think why it is that so many of your edits are being reverted in the first place. If a large proportion of your edits are reverted by a large range of different editors, then it may perhaps suggest that there are problems with your editing. You need to try to address those problems.
  3. You have a habit of removing maintenance templates from articles without addressing teh reasons they are there, as for example in this edit.
  4. It is entirely clear that you only purpose in editing Wikipedia is promoting certain politicians. You do this in various ways, such as creating promotional articles, adding promotional content about them in other articles where they are of at best marginally relevant, attempting to obstruct deletion discussions on your spam articles, attacking other editors who get in the way of your campaign, etc etc. Wikipedia is not a medium for promotion or advertising of any person, organisation, political view, or anything else, and an editor who persists in using Wikipedia for such purposes can be indefinitely blocked.
  5. I see above that at 20:07, 28 September 2011 you were told about not removing an AfD notice from an article while the discussion was still in progress, and you referred to doing so as a "mistake". However, you had already at least four times been informed that this was not acceptable practice. The first time you did this it may perhaps have been a mistake, but it is difficult to see how you can keep on making the same mistake after having been repeatedly informed about it. In addition, your block for "‎Disruptive editing" came a few minutes after an occasion when you did that, which in turn came a few minutes after you were warned that doing so again would lead to a block, so the message must have got through to you. Frankly, claiming that you are still doing this by "mistake" is completely implausible.

Since you are persisting in various kinds of disruptive editing, including the kinds which led to your previous block, you have been blocked again, this time for three days. I strongly urge you to reconsider how you are editing, and try to avoid the same problems when the block expires.

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. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:09, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I accept my punishment and apologize. I may have the knowledge but not the personality to be a good wiki citizen. I will try to change signed Ghfkghdkfhsk

I have completed the Bill Hagan article.[edit]

Please review my article and delete any information that does not meet standards or the entire article if the admins feel it does not belong- I hope this article has met you standard and that you will not hold me newbie behavior against me. I have no plans to make any futher contributions and will be moving on to another subject matter. Thank you Burt signed Ghfkghdkfhsk

Nomination of New York Federalist Party for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article New York Federalist Party is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New York Federalist Party until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:27, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

October 2011[edit]

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because your username, Ghfkghdkfhsk, does not meet our username policy.

Your username is the only reason for this block. You are welcome to choose a new username (see below).

A username should not be promotional, related to a "real-world" group or organization, misleading, offensive, or disruptive. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account. 

You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our policy guidelines. Alternatively, if you have already made edits and you wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:

  1. Adding {{unblock-un|your new username here}} on your user talk page. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked, as you can usually still edit your own talk page. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "E-mail this user" on their talk page.
  2. At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
  3. Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names. The account is created upon acceptance, thus do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Changing username.
If you feel that you were blocked in error, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Danger (talk) 20:39, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ghfkghdkfhsk&oldid=1072553030"