User talk:FOSBusters

Welcome!

Hello, FOSBusters, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Yann (talk) 10:19, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We need to talk

We need to talk about your edits to make them fit with Wikipedia policy. For transparency's sake, it would be best to use the article talk page. This is not something that is going to get fixed by edit-warring, and it's in your interests to present your views as soon as possible. Cheers. --Pete (talk) 23:47, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What do you want? Is that a threat saying it is in my interests to present my views? On What? You deleted everything contributed even where sourced it was sourced and questioned sources even where credible. I am not interested in edit wars at all. If you want to delete people's contributions that is your choice but I think it is oppressive. You can just edit it to make it fit the policy directly; if it is too onerous or the content is worthless just delete it and be oppressive. But a great deal of the content is quality in my opinion and well sourced, indeed reasonable. It is disappointing that you deleted the criticisms section; silencing what was basically an amalgam of dissenting opinions; you could have just balanced it out. Perhaps we could just have one line that says, "sometimes FOS has criticisms". Otherwise tell me a simple method to bring in line with the policy. Your language is highly exclusionary, "we don't" etc. I thought Wikipedia was an inclusive force enabling people. Up to you but I am not really interested in being lectured.

Good. Let's discuss the article on the article talk page so that other editors can contribute. Thanks. --Pete (talk) 01:41, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No thanks. Keep your deletions. I don't believe my input will be valued. Oppress opinion as you wish.

You need to actually read the content Skyring. Clearly there are references. There are clearly references you just dont look genuine when you delete something that clearly does have references. If you need help digesting sources then thats okay. But blanket deletions tend to just cover things up. I am sure you are all about transparency not cover ups right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.128.82.5 (talk) 08:34, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 2015

Hello, I'm I dream of horses. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Financial Ombudsman Service (Australia) with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{Ping|I dream of horses}} to your message. ^{(talk to me) (contributions)} @ 01:23, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, apparently if things are not sourced we should delete them. Nothing was sourced. Please see recent deletions by Skyring for example. @I dream of horses: FOSBusters (talk) 01:51, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, 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 necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 11:57, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DS alert american politics

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 all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, 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 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.

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:25, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just an FYI... I sent one to myself also. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:25, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@NewsAndEventsGuy: thanks for this, please revert my edits if possible. I should have confined to the talk page. Just wanted to make a suggestion.

No prob... these things are FYI in nature and I'm passing them out to everyone, or at least trying for every one, who shows up at the Occupation related pages more than once. You can hand 'em out to if you are so inclined. By definition they are no fault and FYI in nature. Carry on! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 08:19, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bitcoin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Block chain. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:35, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Australian Banker's Association (September 8)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Abdullah Alam was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Australian Banker's Association and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Abdullah Alam (talk) 03:48, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! FOSBusters, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Abdullah Alam (talk) 03:48, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Australian Banker's Association (October 15)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by JJBers was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Not proven to be notable

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Australian Banker's Association and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

— JJBers (talk) 02:13, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, FOSBusters. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Australian Banker's Association

Hello, FOSBusters. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Australian Banker's Association".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. 1989 13:47, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, FOSBusters. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]