Welcome!

Hello, Lionelt, 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, like Good Shepherd Lutheran School, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, 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:

• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

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:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Guy0307 (talk) 07:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Good Shepherd Lutheran School, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Non-notable school

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Guy0307 (talk) 07:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Good Shepherd Lutheran School has been reverted.
Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): \bfacebook\.com (links: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=34433734952).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 06:10, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, I would not agree. I don't think the group in question is an official site. Guy0307 (talk) 11:26, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mainly the first one. I can't see how an alumni group on facebook is "official", but I'm not an expert on external links. Guy0307 (talk) 08:15, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No further objections. Guy0307 (talk) 06:27, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Lionelt. Please take a few minutes to get an overview of Wikipedia's community standards and protocols. We operate by consensus here. It's especially important to make sure of consensus support for substantive edits in content or tone to articles about contentious issues, such as Homosexual agenda. There is presently no consensus to support the edit you made to that article's lead, and so the edit has been reverted. NPOV is definitely a crucial piece of Wikipedia policy, but the edit you described as bringing neutrality to the lead in fact imposed a particular point of view. The present lead wording is the result of discussion and work over a very long time. Please join the discussion at Talk:Homosexual agenda if you feel the present lead needs substantial change. Thanks for editing coöperatively. —Scheinwerfermann ^T·_C00:48, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Citation Barnstar
		Lionelt, I award you this "Citation" Barnstar for the work detailed in this talk page section. You found a reliable source citation for a particularly pivotal quotation. Inclusion of this (now well documented) quote improves the article immensely. Congratulations on your success, and keep up the good work! (sdsds - talk) 07:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring 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.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 04:51, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing a page's content back to how you believe it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree with your changes. Please stop editing the page and use the talk page to work toward creating a version of the page that represents consensus among the editors involved. Wikipedia provides a page explaining how this is accomplished. If discussions reach an impasse, you can request help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution such as a third opinion. In some cases, you may wish to request page protection while a discussion to resolve the dispute is ongoing.

If you continue edit warring, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia—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, or whether it involves the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also, please 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 do not violate the three-revert rule— if things indicate that you intend to continue reverting content on the page. --Dr.enh (talk) 20:47, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This warning is purely retaliatory because I reported this user to AN3. Does anyone know if I can blank this? Lionelt (talk) 22:31, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]