User talk:Boredjohn

Speedy deletion of Blog Quiz[edit]

A tag has been placed on Blog Quiz requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Macy (Review me!) 20:01, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I am working on that page. please be patient.

thank you for putting a link to that page here. that is useful. there is too much other text about rules though. --Boredjohn (talk) 20:09, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have placed an under construstion sign on your page to avoid the speedy deletion messages. Please note that if the article is still not up to standard after a few days then it will still continue to be deleted --Tresiden (talk) 20:20, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you delete it, you will need to email me a full copy of it before doing so. --Boredjohn (talk) 20:22, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't personally delete it myself and I may not be the one to tag it for deletion so I doubt that will happen so I suggest you make a back up yourself. --Tresiden (talk) 20:25, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't do that. A wiki is a living work. It might change over time. If I add content to it and thus release it into the public domain, you can't just delete that. I can't even comprehend that. Can I call you?--Boredjohn (talk) 20:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

also I am registered. why do i have to keep typing captchas? Can that be turned off?--Boredjohn (talk) 20:48, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't read them and have to get my daughter to do them for me. Is their an audio version?--Boredjohn (talk) 20:49, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Link placement[edit]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you.--Herby ^{talk thyme} 06:29, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Sorry but you are wrong here.

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't add any fucking links you shithead. If you want to call me and dicuss this over the phone we can. I am going to revert your deletions of my changes. --Boredjohn (talk) 15:19, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for continuing to add spam links. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia and potentially penalized by search engines. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Your language does not assist your case either. You keep putting in a large number of external links that are against link policy. If you place these again without discussion on the talk page of the article you will be blocked indefinitely --Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Google results are dynamic and changing they should not be linked to no matter what. One day they might be correct and the next they might contain inappropriate content. I was mad because you undid the source citation that took me an hour to do. Wikipedia is not a primary source. It must reference secondary sources. You are wrong here. I was wrong for using inappropriate language and i accept that. You are wrong here and now you have to accept it? capice? Also how do i pm you my phone number so we can discuss this in a more personal manner? --Boredjohn (talk) 15:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess no one is going to unblock me. I'll just resign myself to registering a new account on a new ip address to fix these issues. --Boredjohn (talk) 15:40, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Actually I have reconsidered my purpose here. I request that my account be deleted permanently and that all additions I have made be removed. If this is not done within a week, I'll do it myself.--Boredjohn (talk) 15:54, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my comments on the article talk page. With a little calm discussion the matter can be resolved. Please do not re-register under another account. Wikipedia has quite strict policy on editors who do this. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:14, 12 June 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

Herbythyme has let his emotions get in the way of correctly performing his administrative duties

Decline reason:

The blocking admin's emotions had nothing to do with it, spamming to external links is against policy. The personal attack is also intolerable. I don't have much confidence that you are learning anything from this so far,but, ride out the temporary block comeback and make make useful contribs, but don't make anymore personal attacks or someone may extend this block.— Ѕandahl 16:09, 12 June 2008 (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.

I was asked to take a second look at this also. I think Herby's actions were proper. I'll also add that he's one our cooler-tempered admins. I've never seen Herby lose his temper but if he ever does, I pity the fool that causes it. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Blog Quiz[edit]

A tag has been placed on Blog Quiz requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. 16x9 (talk) 02:49, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Blog Quiz[edit]

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

no sources, not notably, no content

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. 16x9 (talk) 02:14, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Blog Quiz[edit]

I have nominated Blog Quiz, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blog Quiz. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. 16x9 (talk) 18:55, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]