Bradley555

June 2012

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is invited to contribute, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Piracy in Somalia, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:50, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Piracy in Somalia with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Tiderolls 15:04, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Timothy Martin

Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Mdann52 (talk) 15:16, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

July 2012

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. "Attack" may not be the right word to describe the article Timothy Martin, but it made unsupported about a living person, which would be libellous if untrue. Such statements are unacceptable. Adding that to the fact that none of your other edits have been constructive, and it is difficult to avoid the impression that you are not here to help to build the encyclopaedia. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:37, 20 July 2012 (UTC)