User talk:Cloud forest

March 2018[edit]

What do you intend to use the sandbox page you have created for? The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:31, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I intend to write a Wikibook for Wikiversity (Cloud forest (talk) 20:55, 9 March 2018 (UTC))[reply]

OK, but Wikipedia is not the place to do that. Wikipedia user space is not a web host for holding pages unrelated to work for Wikipedia. I see that you have already created a version of the same page in a sandbox at Wikiversity, and you should continue editing it there. If you wish to copy the changes you have made on your Wikipedia copy of it over to Wikiversity, then I suggest doing so as soon as possible, as the Wikipedia sandbox is likely to be deleted. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 08:16, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May I keep it for my personal use as a navigation index? Cloud forest (talk) 08:34, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. As I said above, Wikipedia user space is not a web host for holding pages unrelated to work for Wikipedia. I see that after being informed of the situation and having responded here you have continued to add content to the sandbox. I also see that after being informed of the situation and having responded here you have edited Wikiversity, so you have had opportunity to copy the content across if you wished to do so. Giving you such an opportunity was my reason for not deleting the page, and since that no longer applies, I shall now delete it. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:48, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. If you need guidance on how to create appropriate pages, try using the Article Wizard. I am well prepared to believe that you originally came here sincerely believing that it would be acceptable to use Wikipedia as a web host for content not intended for use in connection with work for Wikipedia. However, re-creating the page after it had been made abundantly clear to you that it was not acceptable is a different matter. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:39, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The page it´s a navigation index usefull for everyone. Cloud forest (talk) 16:45, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mammal[edit]

Cloud forest, other editors including me have no idea why you have posted an enormous table on the Talk:Mammal page. Presumably you want us to comment or discuss something to do with it, but there is no indication what that might be. The table is evidently not suitable for the Mammal page as it isn't readily comprehensible, doesn't seem to add anything useful, and consumes a large amount of space, but perhaps you have some other purpose for it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:01, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I read on Mammal´s talk under #57 "Taxonomy section" your concern about it, I think I solved the Problem, not the theoretical but the design. Cloud forest (talk) 19:32, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That discussion was already resolved User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 20:39, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 2018[edit]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use talk pages for inappropriate discussions. --Mr Fink (talk) 11:42, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"List of mammal species" article[edit]

Just wanted to make sure you know about the discussion about List of mammal species, which you worked on. Please check it out. --Nessie (talk) 16:03, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Cloud forest, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. The Teahouse is an awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us!

Proposed deletion of List of mammal species[edit]

The article List of mammal species has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Redundant with List of mammal genera and other taxonomic categorizations we already have as well as way too much for a list.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Kingofaces43 (talk) 15:17, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, did you notice that people may try to get articles deleted with excuses like "it's too long", even though your article is no where near as long as articles like List of municipalities of Brazil? The same person told me here that I have not given sources for that article which contribute to notability, even though, as I mentioned there, among my sources is Guinness to show how notable it is! Leo1pard (talk) 05:28, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of mammal species for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of mammal species is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of mammal species until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Elmidae (talk · contribs) 13:01, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Like what I said earlier, but anyway, let me see if we can have this at least as a redirect to List of mammal genera, since he mentioned this there. Leo1pard (talk) 13:35, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, List of mammal species/navigation[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, List of mammal species/navigation. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – List of mammal species. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at List of mammal species. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Narky Blert (talk) 23:48, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

List of mammal species (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Manu, Parisii, Primus, Taki, Masu, Superba, Salinae, Acrodonta and Tomensis

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of animals (latin)[edit]

The article List of animals (latin) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Sorry, Wikipedia is not a dictionary, WP:NOTDICTIONARY. That's what Wiktionary is for.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Largoplazo (talk) 13:16, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment[edit]

I'm just curious; what did you intend by this comment at WT:TREE? ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 23:06, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments at Mammal are equally hard to follow and appear to be widely off-topic. Please only contribute to talk pages when you have something definite to discuss on the article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:01, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for continuing to do nothing other than post disruptive comments on talk pages, after being warned that you would be blocked if you continued to disrupt talk pages.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ‑ Iridescent 11:31, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You tell me. Cloud forest (talk) 16:25, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Cloud forest (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I want to continue editing the timeline of glaciation

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 18:30, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Cloud forest (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I will do my best Cloud forest (talk) 18:38, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have not addressed the reason for the block. If you do not do that in your next request, you will lose access to this page too, making it harder to request unblock. 331dot (talk) 21:48, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.