User talk:Gletiecq

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Dar-Ape 20:18, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't remove legitimate warning messages from this page minutes after they are added. You may archive them if you wish, or you may discuss the matter with me if you disagree with the reason I left it. Thanks, Dar-Ape 20:31, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. Thanks for keeping an eye on this and helping to calm things down. Gletiecq 20:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Faisal Gill[edit]

Hello again, Gletiecq! Assuming you are referring to these two edits, the user did provide a valid reason, and even if he seems to be a single purpose account, that does not discount all of his contributions. Are you sure he is a "paid political consultant for his campaign," or do you just think he might be? If you don't have proof, it is best not to state things like this as if they are fact. As for handling the situation, you have already taken the first step-- contacting the user politely on his talk page. For that I commend you. If the user does not reply, I think it would be fine to reinclude the content if you see fit, specifying your reason either in the edit summary or the article talk. Cheers, Dar-Ape 22:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Huber is contracted by the Faisal Gill campaign to host and manage his website. The whois for faisalgill.com indicates that it is served at huberspace.net, which is owned by Jim Huber. Gletiecq 03:10, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... In that case, this seems like a conflict of interest. I have contacted Jimhuber about this. Thanks for being so vigilant, Dar-Ape 03:51, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gall article[edit]

Hello! I must apologize for being somewhat strapped for time, so I haven't had time to look into the issue extensively. However, User:Jimhuber does not seem to have been active recently, so I would continue to discuss, and revert if he becomes inactive again. However, if the problem persists, you can look for a third opinion, report it at the conflict of interest noticeboard, or choose one of the other dispute resolution processes. Let me know if you have any other questions, Dar-Ape 02:33, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Hamilton Sandwich[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Hamilton Sandwich, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Non-notable candidate for election, remotely BLP1E with one WP:RS piece based on the name novelty.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. SpacemanSpiff (talk) 22:46, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]