User talk:CanCliff

Ongoing AFD discussion
Please do not blank an ongoing AFD discussion, it is not appropriate to take that kind of summary action. You may be unfamiliar with Wikipedia practices, so I'm going to assume you didn't mean any harm, but it's really the wrong way to do things. Just leave it for an admin to close. FrozenPurpleCube 04:02, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * And I see you blanked Scott Jessop as well. If you do feel this should be deleted, the proper way to do it is to add the  tag instead of blanking it, especially since there's an ongoing AFD.  And as far as it goes, I'm sensing a bit of hostility on your part towards Wikipedia, but I think some of it is personal vanity and some of it is unfamiliarity with Wikipedia.  There's a reason it's a concern for anybody involved in a subject of an article to edit it.  Personal biases do exist, and in this case, none of us know you are who you claim.  Really, you aren't anything right now except a name on the Internet.  If you wish to offer verification of yourself, there is a means to do that, but it'd do nothing to address the other concerns.  Notability and the existence of third-party reliable sources is an existing standard for inclusion on Wikipedia, because that's the only way an attempt at accuracy can even be made.  It may not be perfect, but it's what we've got.  The fact that you're involved is itself a problem, since it tends to lead to personal feelings, not objective judgment.  Not saying you can't rise past that and offer valid sources of confirmation, but that it's quite hard, and you've not done it that way.  Instead, you call these actions a lynching.  That may happen on Wikipedia sometimes, but I don't feel this is one of those cases.  FrozenPurpleCube 04:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)