Clarince63

You may have noticed over the past few days that the MOTD that you link to on your user page has simply displayed a red link. This is due to the fact that not enough people are reviewing pending MOTDs here. Please help us keep the MOTD template alive and simply go and review a few of the MOTDs in the list. That way we can have a real MOTD in the future rather than re-using (This space for rent). Any help would be appreciated! ·Add§hore· ^{Talk To Me!} 14:09, 6 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Clarince63:

I am experimenting with Wiki edits, but my intent was not vandalism; we're talking about Wikipedia in class this morning. I'm one of Tom's students, which is why we chose him as a test subject. The second edit I made (changing 2009 to 2012) is correct, as corroborated at http://sciwrite.mit.edu/faculty. I'm going to look at changing the page again now, but will update the reference with a current accessed date.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.189.77.90 (talk) 14:13, 16 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Test editing is all very well and good, but please keep them at the Wikipedia:Sandbox. Don't experiment with edits on normal pages, please. If you are sure that the information is correct, then feel free to change it. But make sure it has a reliable source. --Clarince63 (talk) 14:20, 16 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

hi! you reverted my edit claiming i had not provided an edit summary, and left the following message on my talk page = "

  Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Rachel's Tomb with this edit. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Clarince63 (talk) 23:16, 18 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

When I reverted your edit, you deleted the above content from my talk page. I would like an apology and explanation for the misleading comment in the edit summary and for the irrelevant notice. .93.96.148.42 (talk) 23:28, 18 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your explanation. In light of the comment above- which sounds factually correct to me - I think you should manually check all of your recent edits. Michael93.96.148.42 (talk) 23:38, 18 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I am humbly requesting you point your input on the population discussion going on at the Canadian Sikhism talk page. Thank you. --Schmeater (talk) 00:40, 29 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, Logan! :) --Clarince63 (talk) 10:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

I appreciate it, Thanks!--Clarince63 (talk) 00:01, 6 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

I really can't understand how this edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recurring_Futurama_characters?diff=490174900) amounts to vandalism. The information I added is relevant to the character under which it was added and, most importantly, it is correct information. Please explain what exactly I did wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.234.185.201 (talk) 21:48, 1 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

It was my mistake. Looking at the contents of your edit, I thought it was vandalism. You put the content back on the page and it is still there, so no more action needs to be taken. I removed my warning from your talk page. Contact the editor that warned you before me for a similar edit and ask him to remove his warning if you feel it was placed there without cause. I am a human and make mistakes sometimes, and I apologize. Cheers, --Clarince63 (talk) 22:45, 1 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading File:2600 Fall 2011.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:38, 17 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

No hard feelings Clarince63 I will leave you alone now.

Sincerely, Opossum Minister — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.93.6.11 (talk) 19:29, 31 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Are you sure its at 10, for me its only at 6 reverts per minute. Dan653 (talk) 19:51, 2 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I was sure when I posted the update. The RPM counter on Huggle changes quickly. I waited about 60 seconds for the counter to return to normal after logging in (which is customary) and I estimated what the average was at the time. It was about 10 at the time. But I'm not denying what you saw, it probably was 6 reverts per minute. It changes quickly due to lag between your computer and the server that is dolling out the edits to display on Huggle. Or simply for that time being there aren't many reverts. Cheers, --Clarince63 (talk) 22:10, 2 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

My edit to the list of mlb single season record is constructive. The information on wins is wrong. Charlie Radbourn had 60 wins in 1884. But the record wrongfully belongs to Jack Chesbro. I was trying to put the actual record holder on the page. The proof I have is from the National Baseball Hall of Fame.

Greetings Clarince63

I've randomly gotten this message:

Information.svg Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Pulpit, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. 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. --Clarince63 (talk) 21:19, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't remember having ever made any contributions to Pulpit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulpit)

Could you please tell me what I have written and why it has been removed, or if this is an error...

Thanks for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nallados101 (talk • contribs) 21:31, 8 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Motto of the Day (WP:MOTD) is in a state of emergency and really needs your help! There are not enough editors who are reviewing or nominating mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review, and this probably means that you will notice a red link or “This space for rent” as our mottos for the next weeks and months.

Please take a moment to review the nominations and nominate your own new mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review and Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/'Specials. Any help would be appreciated! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 29 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

This message has been sent by pjoef on behalf of Motto of the Day to all editors of the English Wikipedia who are showing MOTD's templates on their pages, and to all the participants to MOTD: (page, template, and category).

Your upload of File:Clarince63 (1).png or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:53, 10 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

An article you have edited List of participants in the creation–evolution controversy has been nominated for deletion. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_participants_in_the_creation%E2%80%93evolution_controversy FYI --Kaptinavenger (talk) 08:15, 9 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

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) 16:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply