User talk:Supaflyrobby

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi ! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 09:41, Wednesday, November 13, 2024 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

May 2014

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - - MrBill3 (talk) 10:33, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of John Ruffo

The article John Ruffo has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. reddogsix (talk) 00:15, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion of my edit on Celia Farber

You gave no reason for reverting my edit on Celia Farber (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celia_Farber). I think you should have and I don't agree with your reversion. I do not believe that taking out adjectives (as I did) that modify the noun "beliefs" is a bad edit. Perhaps a third party (or third and fourth party - or more parties) should give their input on this. Journalism should be objective and I will respect an objective consensus. Thank you - and Happy New Year! Ray Jameson (talk) 13:59, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This has been discussed in the past ad nauseam on several articles that pertain to AIDS Denialism. The fact that their beliefs are false is the very aspect which makes them notable. Feel free to solicit the advice of other editors out there who edit science and biology based articles as their main area of focus, but ultimately I think you will find the same reception. Cheers. Supaflyrobby (talk) 14:15, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thank you for the reply.Ray Jameson (talk) 04:51, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reptiles on 9/11

I moved this to Talk:9/11 conspiracy theories#Reptilian aliens. Feel free to revert if you object.

Discretionary sanctions on 9/11 related pages

Supafly, because there has been trouble on this type of page in the past, I feel I should give you the information below. There is nothing wrong with your conduct, this is simply a boilerplate message that is generally posted to anyone editing in this area.

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 the September 11 attacks, 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.

Thanks, Oiyarbepsy (talk) 00:48, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have never edited a 9/11 related page ever, actually, which you can verify from my past edit history. Nonetheless, I appreciate the info. Supaflyrobby (talk) 00:52, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

9/11 conspiracy theories is a 9/11 related page. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:33, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oiyarbepsy Yes, I realize, today was my first time ever was all I was referencing. I do appreciate the information. Frankly, after taking a cursory look over the talk page archives for the article today, I doubt it will be anything I would ever want to spend much time on and retract further consideration on my proposed edit. Life is too short to spend it pissed off and/or annoyed. Though my hats off to editors that have the sack to put up with that kind of environment. It would drive me nuts. Supaflyrobby (talk) 04:42, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's the kind of article where things go crazy cause the true-believers want to re-write the whole damn thing. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:44, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The first draft of a David Icke paragraph is now ready for your deft touch. Grammar'sLittleHelper (talk) 18:36, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar'sLittleHelper well when I get off duty tonight I will look it over. Thanks for the help Supaflyrobby (talk) 19:38, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chicago Public Schools, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shakedown. 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) 11:26, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Supaflyrobby. 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]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Supaflyrobby. 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Supaflyrobby. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]