User talk:CyclePat2

RfC

Saturn Corporation
I reverted your edits because I feel that a stock letter from the head of Saturn Saab is not notable enough to be included in an encyclopedia, as it adds nothing to the article. I also restored the location of the logo, as the change was unnecessary and disrupted the layout of the article. You're welcome to restore these edits if you feel I was wrong, or open a discussion on the talk page and get opinions from other editors.

I also undid your recent mass deletion of content since there is no wikipedia policy saying to delete massive chunks of articles that aren't properly sourced. You're welcome to add "citation needed" spots around the article, and you're welcome to place headers that say those chunks are not properly sourced, and even start a discussion about your proposed deletions, but mass deletion is not the proper way to go about cleaning up an article. --Denimmonkey 12:44, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Lowermybills.com AfD
The author was adding some more references to the article at about the same time you were commenting on the AfD. The NY Times article on the ads would take this out of the realm of spam. DarkAudit 18:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC) But I guess his reference is a little less repetitive in terms of content. :) --CyclePat2 19:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I was just about to try and add this reference but I got an edit conflict: Good job.

Saturn
Sure, I could do that. I just didn't agree with that mass deletion, as it turned the article into practically nothing. What was anybody who was trying to learn more abotu Saturn going to do? A lot of unsourced info is better than no info at all. Karrmann 10:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, it looks like you are kinda being disruptive on teh Saturn page judging by your edits there, as well as getting blocked over some talk page comments. It seems that a lot of edits you made were disruptive. And what was that "According to XXX" all about? I think you should probably step away from that page, it just seems that you are causing a lot of problems there. Karrmann 11:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Your unblocking request
I will get as much as info as I can on it. But honestly, Pat, from what I've seen, it's pretty legit. You should know better than to be that uncivil. You are most certainly not a new user. But as I said, I'll take a look. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 13:25, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Saturn VUE.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Saturn VUE.png. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 03:58, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Garden Villas and sourcing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_Villas%2C_Houston%2C_Texas

That title you put there is incorrect - it HAS sources. The police section is cited, as is the park section. I cited the school section too.

If you feel sources are insufficient, try the "refimprove" tag. I am changing the no source tag to this new one. WhisperToMe 04:32, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Access Now
http://www.accessnow.ca/

File:Saturn VUE letter.png listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Saturn VUE letter.png, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 23 February 2020 (UTC)