User talk:Daredevil0405

Speedy deletion of Freedom from Foreign Oil Scorecard
A tag has been placed on Freedom from Foreign Oil Scorecard 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 a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance 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 biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  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. Ros0709 (talk) 19:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Freedom from Foreign Oil Scorecard
A tag has been placed on Freedom from Foreign Oil Scorecard requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's 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 confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. --Seascic T/C 19:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Removed scorecard
I have removed the scorecards you placed on all of the congrespersons pages. Adding just one scorecard does not help understand the congresspersons positions on issues. Carte Rouge (talk) 21:25, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure. Could you point out some scorecards that need removing? Carte Rouge (talk) 21:35, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, you asked me if there were any other scorecards I'd like to remove. I'm not interested in adding any scorecards. What's you're relationship with Americans for Prosperity? Carte Rouge (talk) 21:39, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I expect that you'll delete that entire selection from Diane Fienstein's website then?

Can I ask why you are deleting a feature that appears on very many congresspeoples website? On what grounds do you do so?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Dianne_Feinstein#Congressional_scorecards Still up, I expect you to delete this soon.

Conflict of interest
I reported what appears to be a conflict of interest of yours at Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard. Please stop adding that scorecard to congresspersons unless it is useful to the understanding of that congressperson. Thanks. Carte Rouge (talk) 23:18, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I believe knowing the Congressman's voting record is very useful to the understanding of that congressman. Would it be more helpful if I were to add each specific piece of legislation he/she voted down with regards to energy policy?


 * It would be useful if there were reliable third party sources that talked about it, yes. The "scorecard" you are listing doesn't provide a lot of information except that one lobbying group ranks a lot of people 0%. If you'd like to mention their positions on drilling in ANWAR or cap-and-trade, find sources and include that information. Are you employed in some way by Americans for Prosperity or a related group? Carte Rouge (talk) 23:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

So you want a third party source that talks about the ratings? Like a newsrelease from an outside source? How do you feel about the section of Feinstein's website that has a list of all her ratings by organizations?

Also, AFP was just recently mentioned in the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal and hosted an event that had every single Republican nominee. I don't know how this constitutes questionably notable. I will posts every single vote that contributed to the 0% rating.

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 13:23, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

3 Revert Rule
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page 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. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Carte Rouge (talk) 15:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 14:00, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Freedom from Foreign Oil Pledge listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Freedom from Foreign Oil Pledge. Since you had some involvement with the Freedom from Foreign Oil Pledge redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Hugh (talk) 16:48, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Freedom from Foreign Oil listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Freedom from Foreign Oil. Since you had some involvement with the Freedom from Foreign Oil redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Hugh (talk) 16:49, 12 May 2015 (UTC)