User talk:Shaip2014

October 2010[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article 2011 and beyond in film, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. SummerPhD (talk) 23:52, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Usb10 ^Connected? 21:19, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Avatar (2009-10 Film)[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Avatar (2009-10 Film), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Avatar (2009 film). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:03, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Before making a controversial move such as this one, please start a discussion on the article's Talk page so that editors have a chance to offer their feelings on the move and consensus can be established. Thanks. Doniago (talk) 21:18, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

November 2010[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to 2010s, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot.

Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: 2010s was changed by Shaip2014 (u) (t) redirecting article to non-existant page on 2010-11-27T20:36:55+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 20:37, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

December 2010[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Endleofan. Since you had some involvement with the Endleofan redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so).
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 2011-2020. Since you had some involvement with the 2011-2020 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so).
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect '10. Since you had some involvement with the '10 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so).
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect '11. Since you had some involvement with the '11 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so).
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect '12. Since you had some involvement with the '12 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so).
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect '13. Since you had some involvement with the '13 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so).
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect '14. Since you had some involvement with the '14 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so).
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect '15. Since you had some involvement with the '15 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so).
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect '16. Since you had some involvement with the '16 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so).
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect '17. Since you had some involvement with the '17 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so).
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect '18. Since you had some involvement with the '18 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so).
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect '19. Since you had some involvement with the '19 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so).
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect '20. Since you had some involvement with the '20 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so).
— Arthur Rubin (talk) 08:35, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2010[edit]

I can understand your addition of Category:2010s, but the convention so far is to include year articles only in year categories, not in decade, centuries, or millennia. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:40, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The land of ham listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The land of ham. Since you had some involvement with the The land of ham redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so).

Proposed deletion of The Carbon Diaries: 2015[edit]

The article The Carbon Diaries: 2015 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable book.

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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. E. Fokker (talk) 23:35, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of October 11, 2010 Brooklyn Hail Storm[edit]

The article October 11, 2010 Brooklyn Hail Storm has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable minor weather event.

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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. E. Fokker (talk) 23:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Books set in the 2010s[edit]

Category:Books set in the 2010s, which you created, has been nominated by another editor for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 12:40, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion tag removal warning[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed a file deletion tag from Twenty twelve. When removing deletion tags, 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. Changing a redirect up for deletion to an article or disambiguation page is allowable. Changing it to a translation of the redirect into English is not. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:55, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Twentens[edit]

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

Dictionary Definition (WP:DICDEF)

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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. First Light (talk) 18:20, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Twentens[edit]

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Twentens, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. Safiel (talk) 01:44, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My proposed deletion of your article Twentens[edit]

There currently exists an article on Wikipedia by the name of 2010s. The basic subject matter is covered by that article. If you want to edit that article to reference "Twenens" being used as a nickname for the 2010s, that would be fine, but just the fact that it is a nickname is insufficient for it to stand as an article on its own. Safiel (talk) 02:46, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]