Darkfight

Why?

Why did you delete the changes to the Beacon Charter page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.14.28.126 (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I didn't know about that rule and in the future I refrain from doing that. However I disagree with you on the point of the faculty members. After all me and many other students would not agree. When Beacon closed down it wasn't just the students but it was also the faculty who fought to keep it open. Beacon would not be the same place it it wasn't for it's unique faculty which is why i think that the faculty should be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.14.28.126 (talk) 23:40, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Friendly note regarding talk page messages

Hello. As a recent editor to User talk:74.238.181.211, I wanted to leave a friendly reminder that as per WP:USER, editors may remove messages at will from their own talk pages. While we may prefer that comments be archived instead, policy does not prohibit users -including anonymous editors like this one- from deleting messages or warnings from their own talk pages. The only kinds of talk page messages that cannot be removed (as per WP:BLANKING) are declined unblock requests (but only while blocks are still in effect), confirmed sockpuppet notices, or shared IP header templates (for unregistered editors). However, it should be noted that these exceptions only exist in order to keep a user from potentially gaming the system. Thank you, — Kralizec! (talk) 18:54, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

RutNet page

Hi - i am not sure why this is going to be deleted - it is just a community website that means alot to the local people of rutland - pls could you clarify how you would recommend changing? Many thanks --Nicsteatfeild (talk) 19:53, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Your rollback request

Hello Darkfight, I have granted rollback rights to your account in accordance with your request. Please be aware that rollback should be used to revert vandalism/spam/blatantly unconstructive edits, and that using it to revert anything else (such as by revert-warring or reverting edits you disagree with) can lead to it being removed from your account...sometimes without any warning, depending on the admin who becomes aware of any misuse. If you think an edit should require a reason for reverting, then don't use rollback and instead, use a manual edit summary. For practice, you may wish to see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 23:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

igloo

I've added you to the igloo whitelist. Be aware that anything you do using igloo is entirely your responsiblity, and if anything goes wrong, you have to fix it. Let me know if you have any problems. Ale_Jrb^talk 19:30, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Darkfight. You have new messages at ShinyGee's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thomas D Rice

Hi Darkfight. The word 'reminiscences' is actually spelt 'reminiscenses' in the NYT article quoted (available online at the New York Times website). But it seems to be causing undue upset: if you like, you can revert it to the quoted spelling and put (sic) after it? RLamb (talk) 19:47, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

3OH!3

why did you change my update??? twas just a bit of fun and im pretty sure no-one uses Wikipedia for info on bands, so no-one would have seen it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hazzy999 (talk • contribs) 22:02, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Reverting my edit on Edline

Oops, I meant to restore the article Edline to a previous version and not just undo the last edit. What I was trying to get rid of was a made up citation. Think I got it now. SQGibbon (talk) 22:22, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

whats up bro. how the heck are you doin? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.77.197.104 (talk) 22:27, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

How do you edit so fast?

I saw your contributions around 20:58, 30 March 2010 (UTC), in particular. Just wondering how you do it? Are you using a bot? Outback the koala (talk) 21:01, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:15, 24 November 2015 (UTC)