User talk:Bigger digger/Archive 3

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Chair
I moved the Grand National event to The Chair (Grand National) and withdrew the AFD. The Chair is now a dab. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 21:42, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I was going to move it all around once I'd finished adding sources. Cheers, Bigger digger (talk) 21:46, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * If you think it needs a rename, take it to WP:RM. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 22:37, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I see I'm instantly forgettable, having edited on your talk page a few times last year! It's not the process that's a problem, it's the actual final name, but thanks for the help. Best, Bigger digger (talk) 22:41, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Suzy Kassem AFD
Hey, why was the revision history courtesy blanked from the Suzy Kassem AFD article? Was this requested by someone? I see where the involved IP tried to blank the discussion, or remove the closure (I can't tell which), but I am curious as to what happened there. Thanks The Eskimo (talk) 19:04, 24 November 2010 (UTC)


 * There's no more mystery (that I'm aware of). The IP blanked the content after Ron Ritzman had closed it as delete. Instead of getting into some sort of edit war I just put the afd-privacy template on it and noted my action at User_talk:Ron_Ritzman. Given that it was a BLP I didn't think it would be that much of a problem, happy for you to revert if you feel it necessary. Bigger digger (talk) 19:17, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * No, that explanation is sufficient. I do prefer to see AFD histories preserved unless at the specific request of the subject, but, being a BLP, I understand your abundance of caution.  And avoiding edit wars is always a good thing :).  Thanks for clearing it up. The Eskimo (talk) 19:29, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Just for clarity, and I'm sure you realise this but it's unclear from your comment, the AfD history is preserved in the History tab. It's two extra clicks to see the whole debate and the admin close. To be honest, I don't see blanking as a big problem, anyone interested in a deletion debate is able to access the history to see what happened. Bigger digger (talk) 19:58, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I was indeed aware of the existence of the history.  I just wasn't sure about the need for courtesy blanking.  I read up on some similar discussions in the meantime, and saw that one big reason an AFD discussion for a BLP is often blanked is because, upon a Google search, often the "So-and-so has been deleted from Wikipedia for not meeting the notability requirements" comes up as the first search result.  I could understand how that would be less than desirable to someone concerned about their public image.  Anyway, I've learned something new about WP from this whole discussion, and I appreciate your patience.  Happy editing! The Eskimo (talk) 21:26, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It was no trouble, happy editing to you too! Bigger digger (talk) 22:17, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

GruntXProductions
He's been blocked for threatening to DDOS the place, not his name. If he does return, that'll get blocked too. Half Shadow  00:59, 25 November 2010 (UTC)


 * So he's really annoyed that the article that shows the world his efforts gets deleted, flys off the handle and that's it? One strike and you're out? Doesn't seem like a sensible way forward, but then I probably haven't seen as many of these as you have. Bigger digger (talk) 01:05, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * For reference, User:GruntXProductions and this threat. Bigger digger (talk) 01:08, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * When it's that kind of threat, yes. "Do what I want or I'll knock out your website." Even an unlikely threat is still a threat. Half  Shadow  01:15, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I can see why that might actually be the case for legal threats, but how does blocking an editor who's threatened a DDOS attack make that attack less likely? If I made that threat, and the response to it was to block me, it would make me more likely to commence the attack. If someone explained to me the issues (which might have happened, but at a username/article talk page I can't find) and actually engaged with me I would be less likely to instruct my botnet of doom to crush wikipedia! Have I missed a POV here? And are there instances of these sorts of angry threats that have been followed through on, or are we waiting for the real purpose of Stuxnet to be revealed?! Bigger digger (talk) 01:21, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The first link in this chain was actually him writing a very spammy article that had zero chance under another username. That got blocked. Then he comes back and immediately makes threats.  He could have been blocked for coming back with yet another promotional username, actually, come to think about it.  When it comes down to it, though, you can't negotiate or reason with folks with that kind of threat hanging over your head; ignoring it is the only viable course of action.  Courcelles 17:25, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, well if the first article was that awful and they're all out spamming that would make more sense, I hadn't realised they were so bad, as I couldn't find their previous username or the (deleted) article Thanks for the explanation. Bigger digger (talk) 18:01, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Silk Purse Award

 * Thanks MQS, although I can't claim much credit, I just tried to give it a spit and polish after others had done the hard work! Bigger digger (talk) 11:22, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
You have  new messages ( last change ). / ƒETCH COMMS  /  13:47, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ – Bigger digger (talk) 14:19, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Zaha Hadid buildings
Hi Bigger digger, re: Category:Zaha Hadid buildings, a quick acknowledgement of seeing your message, and will not add other archs. to their buildings until have time to read your edit summary and carefully discuss on article's talk page. The intention was for readers to easily and directly find more about a given architect, and some use the cat. bar more than other means for navigation. These cat. adds were in good faith as I had forgotten doing them before, and was not knowingly reverting your efforts-(re)adding links without listening-talking first, nonetheless my apologies.---cheers--- Look2See1  t a l k →  16:29, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Replied at User talk:Look2See1. Bigger digger (talk) 20:35, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

ebiquity
Hi Bigger digger – apologies for the late reply, I have been ill over the last week.

I would appreciate your assistance in turning the article into something which can be used on Wikipedia.

How can we go about making the article Wikipedia friendly?

Thanks,

Wwjx0p (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 17:17, 1 December 2010


 * Right, first off, sorry for the slow reply, been a bit busy recently. Now I can spend a Friday night on wiki-business, rock'n'roll!
 * Second, remember to sign your posts with 4 tildes (~). They live above the #-key on my keyboard, or you can click the link below the Save button that shows the four squiggles.
 * Next, article time! It's currently at User:Bigger digger/Ebiquity, and we can edit it there. The thing it really needs is better sourcing to meet WP:Verifiability. Following what WP:Reliable sources have written about a company, instead of using the information provided by a company, it is possible to better avoid the accusation of promotional overtones. See WP:YFA for a helpful starter in many more words than I can muster!
 * If you get started I'll drop in and have a look, and help out where I can. There are a few other things I want to attend to first, but if you have any queries in the meantime just post them here and I'll do my best to answer them and help you out.
 * Cheers, Bigger digger (talk) 21:01, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

deletion rationale
Hi you misunderstood me. I didn't say the rationale for deletion was yours, merely that the rationale stated (in this case i referred to pro-delete comments and also comments made on the hold my hand article) was baseless. Also I made the comment that the relevant people should go read the crystal policy properly. Best wishes xx--Manboobies (talk) 10:46, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * You're talking about Articles_for_deletion/Hold_My_Hand_(Michael_Jackson_song), where you specifically refer to the rationale, which I read to be the reason for the nomination, which is what I provided, so it did feel like a criticism, but hey-ho, joys of the English language! Thanks for dropping by and happy editing. Bigger digger (talk) 19:18, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Ebiquity
Hi Bigger digger,

Hope you are well.

I’ve now rewritten the article after taking another look at the notes. Will it be possible for you to take a look at the updated article and let me know if you feel it is ready to be published?

Thanks Wwjx0p (talk) 16:09, 7 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Seems you got a bit impatient and pushed it across! Sorry not to reply sooner, RL getting in the way! It's definitely a lot better, I'll go and tweak it a bit now, but it's good work, well done! Bigger digger (talk) 19:21, 8 December 2010 (UTC)


 * thanks Bigger digger

Wwjx0p (talk) 09:35, 9 December 2010 (UTC)


 * FWIW Bigger digger, the article has been nominated for deletion. You may have been left out of the notifications since its not super apparent that you are interested in the article. Syrthiss (talk) 14:51, 9 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you Syrthiss, I could well have missed that, should not be wp-ing at the moment! Bigger digger (talk) 00:32, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

James Blake (musician)
Hi. I noticed you recently put a copyvio notice on the above article, claiming that it was a copyright violation of. However, if you look at that link BBC music uses the text from the Wikipedia article! I've reverted this now. Just thought I'd let you know. Thanks! Mhiji (talk) 19:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmmm.... The article uses that page as its main source so not sure about that. I'll have more of a dig around. Thanks for letting me know. Bigger digger (talk) 19:54, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Not really, the only part which uses that page as a source is the sentence which says that his songs have been played by various Radio 1 DJs, which the source does state (if you look at the "Played by" section on the right). Mhiji (talk) 20:00, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Though saying that, the article would benefit from having more sources. Mhiji (talk) 20:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem I have is that the original article uses that BBC page, so what had the BBC written at the time? I can't get the wayback machine to find an older version of the page. I have got some other sources and will add them as soon as I'm sure I'm not adding to a WP:COPYVIO'd article. In fact, I'm going to move this whole conversation to Talk:James Blake (musician) as it's probably more useful there. Bigger digger (talk) 20:17, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Premakeerthi De Alwis
Hi Bigger digger, seems like wipeouting is back with a different user name to edit the Premakeerthi de alwis page. You have kept that page upto wikipedia standards despite numerous attempts by wipeouting to edit the page to sling mud at someone unrelated the murder of Premakirthi de alwis. I would appreciate if you could look into it and keep the page free from people trying to use wikipedia for personal attacks.[]

Thank you. Ramya — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramya20 (talk • contribs) 20:08, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi. I'm afraid I'm not very active in these parts any more. I remember the trouble we had with this editor, why don't you look at the conversations we had at the time and see how we had this stopped. I would guess it was via the Biographies of Living Persons Noticeboard, so you should report it there.


 * Best, Bigger digger (talk) 08:43, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion.--96.231.164.181 (talk) 13:06, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Dysphoria
I am afraid that the IP persists in adding the natural remedies spam link to this article. I have removed twice, but may not be able to watch the article for the next few days.

VinculumMan (talk) 00:49, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

An addition was made to the "Jonathan Kern" page without any sources.
Hello Bigger Digger,

I was the person who created the "Jonathan Kern" page.

On November 23, 2011 the page was edited and the following addition was made with absolutely no sources to substantiate the material:

"Career Kern has built a successful design business Shellshock Designs Ltd. The company specialises in the production of mother of pearl wall and floor coverings, selling to clients in over 30 countries. In recent years, ShellShock Designs Ltd has initiated an extremely active corporate social responsibility culture, and actively supports a number of charitable institutions. Whilst Jonathan has sought to move on from his past life as a playboy adventurer, he has never denied the things that he did, nor has he sought to justify his actions. He has focused on rebuilding his life as a successful designer and businessman. Kern is well liked in business and design circles and has been repeatedly held up as an example of someone who made mistakes in his youth, paid the price, and moved on to build a successful life and career."

I am livid that this addition was allowed with nothing to substantiate it. Playboy adventurer? He has a string of criminal arrests and convictions related to his conning people. In fact, I successfully had an injunction discharged on April 1, 2011 that Jonathan Kern filed against me in the High Court in London, England for posting "untrue and defamatory statements about him".

Can you please let me know how I can object to this addtion? Or can you object on my behalf? I had to have sources for everything that I listed on this page.

Thank you, Elizabeth Grzeszczyk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elizabeth Grzeszczyk (talk • contribs) 03:46, 2 December 2011 (UTC)