User talk:DarkAudit/Archive 2

 ''Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.''

User talk:DarkAudit/Archive User talk:DarkAudit/Archive 3

Previous AfD vote
Hi. You previously voted in an AfD for Tim Bowles. Would you please pop over to Articles for deletion/Tim Bowles (3rd nomination) and give us your input again? Thanks. --Justanother 20:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I looked, really I did
I wanted to make sure that things were different this time around. They weren't. For the most part, only the Atlantic City area papers had any mention of the Freeholders involved in AfD discussions. In some cases, even that wasn't the case. County officeholders who don't achieve notice outside the county are simply not notable enough.

This isn't personal, especially after an eight-month cooling off period. DarkAudit 18:07, 25 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't agree at all with your concerns regarding these articles, but I don't have either the time or the patience to fight this issue as vigorously as I usually do. Given your past involvement with these articles, there is no reason that you could not -- and should not -- have made an effort to approach me in advance regarding your concerns about these articles. Given that the past consensus was that these articles were acceptable as is, placing a gun at my head and demanding that they be improved immediately or deleted is entirely counterproductive. I was more than willing to extend the cooling-off period ad infinitum, and it's not clear why the eight-month timeframe would require that changes be made to improve the article, or require that the article be deleted. Given my inclusionist / eventualist perspective, and the fact that there are many times more articles created every single day than deleted via AfD, I am confident that articles like these will become the status quo, sooner rather than later. Articles such as these, which do have reliable sources available, will undoubtedly prevail. Alansohn 20:22, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

KDKA Images
I kinda thought so, which is why I nixed them. I figured enough damage had been with some of them being up there for as long as they were...Wiki doesn't need a lawsuit for copyright problems. If there is a free image, I will be happy to add that in it's place. - SVRTVDude (VT) 04:46, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Violation of WP:Canvassing
Your attempt to solicit votes are almost certainly in violation of WP:Canvassing. Unless you can provide an acceptable explanation for your actions, this violation will be noted on all of the relevant AfDs. Alansohn 03:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


 * This editor was an involved participant in the relevant AfD discussions the day I initiated them. In fact, he was the first respondent to any of them. I felt contacting him was warranted because he had already commented on the subject. A different set of eyes may see things in ways neither of us may have thought of. As it stands now, it's not much more than the two of us going around in circles. With that, there can be no winners, but only exhausted and disillusioned participants. I do not feel I am in error, but I will not attempt to invite others into the discussion. DarkAudit 03:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Contacting another individual, particularly where your conversation clearly implies that the individual will -- and should -- take one side of a vote, is solicitation plain and simple, and is in direct contravention of any meaningful effort at achieving agreement in Wikipedia. I fundamentally disagree with your efforts and attempts to undermine consensus through clear abuse of the AfD process. All you have done with this latest effort is to demonstrate that you will stop at nothing to see this consensus undermined. A message about this solicitation will be posted at all of the AfDs mentioned, by you or by me. I will give you a few hours to take the opportunity to explain your solicitation on each individual AfD you had listed. If not, I will. Please try to play by some of the rules, now and then. Alansohn 03:53, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You can try to weasel your way out of this one or you can come clean. If you aren't going to post to describe your solicitation, I will be more than happy to do so. Alansohn 04:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Your efforts at solicitation are in extremely bad faith and entirely in contravention to the basic ethos of Wikipedia. I thought you might demonstrate some small measure of good faith. Not to be. Alansohn 04:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I am more than willing to try to convince you and others, and recognize that you are as unlikely to convince me to change my mind as I am to change yours. All I can ask is that some effort be made to try to play by the rules. I have posted the full text of Canvassing, here and at the affected AfDs, which states "Votestacking is sending mass talk messages out to editors who are on the record with a specific opinion (such as via a userbox or other user categorization) and informing them of a current or upcoming vote. In the case of a re-consideration of a previous debate (such as a "no consensus" result on an AFD or CFD), it is similarly unacceptable to send mass talk messages to editors that expressed only a particular viewpoint on the previous debate, such as only "Keep" voters or only "Delete" voters." The case seems rather clear from the text. When I raised the issue to you, all you managed to do was to pull some portion of the article out of context and claim that you had been exonerated. I sincerely hope that in future AfDs you will recognize that such votestacking tactics are fundamentally unethical. Alansohn 05:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

PandaShrimp Media
I saw that, but left it alone, thinking the admins would clean it up. I also noticed her user page immediately redirects to PandaShrimp Media as well. Is that even allowed? Wildthing61476 21:14, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh well, I dont think they'll be posting anymore anyway, now that they realize their free advertising is gone. Wildthing61476 21:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 19:48, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

AfD tag on Frederick Gottlieb
Thanks for your note about the AfD tag on Frederick Gottlieb. That was sloppiness on my part rather than vandalism, by the way. I am well aware that removing the AfD tag won't stop the process. Could you take a look at the new references, by the way? --Eastmain 17:20, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Chris Wright
semi sourced. You may want to reconsider. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:11, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Kakkat house
Ok, feel free to retag, I won't remove it. I'm off now anyway. See what another admin thinks. J Milburn 20:00, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Scooch
I thought that the song was silly, and the performance on the night was terrible - the video was better. Will (We're flying the flag all over the world) 14:11, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

ChemRefer
Please see discussion at Talk:Chemrefer. Thanks, Clicketyclack 20:01, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Maxim Healthcare Services
Check out the "outside sources" proving that the article isn't spam, you're welcome for the laugh! Wildthing61476 20:10, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The best thing about fighting vandals is the vandalism that fires back at me. I swear I get a good laugh out of it! Wildthing61476 20:27, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Reply
Try AfD or PROD. John Reaves (talk) 02:54, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Johnston
I doubt they will. He is ranked #2 on career passing records list, and he was a starter as WVU, so I'll use that as the article's defense. Thanks! John 03:27, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I Lost on Jeopardy
I'm disappointed the trivia section didn't have the questions to go with those answers. Quick! To the Google! :) DarkAudit 01:03, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I've been a Weird Al fan for a long time, and "I Lost on Jeopardy" is one of his classics. I'm still trying to find the German baroness that could suck the chrome off a fender. Alansohn 04:46, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

AfD of Gstaad Palace
Oh, I didn't know that there are other previous comments. I should've checked that. Thanks for inform me. Well, I tried to clean the article, but yes there is strong resistance from the anonIP user. However, I believe WP:OWN cannot guarantee deletion, and the subject is notable but yes it was a spam. BTW, I like the style of this talk page, esp. the faceless image. &mdash; Indon ( reply ) &mdash; 13:45, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

LowerMyBills.com
Please stop trying to delete the LowerMyBills.com page. It is newly created, and could no doubt use expansion, but everything there is factual, either taken from their own site, or empirical observation of their marketing techniques. No content was re-created. The old content was removed, and new content added. - MSTCrow 18:29, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Please revisit Articles for deletion/3WC
Could you please revisit Articles for deletion/3WC? The original version of the article was a bit confusing, but the station is an FCC-licensed broadcaster, not an Internet-only one, and therefore would be automatically considered notable. --Eastmain 04:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

webMethods glue article deletion
Hi there, just wanted to let you know that the webMethods glue article is a work in progress. I am working on it and it will be fleshed out. So if you can unmark it for deletion that'll save me the worry that I'm wasting my time.. :) cheers NathanLee 16:06, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Note I mean webMethods Glue by the way NathanLee 16:06, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Cool, thanks for that.. NathanLee 16:16, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

User notices
DA, thanks for all of your hard work on patrolling new pages. One note: please place a notice on the talk pages of the editors who created pages that you tag for speedy deletion. Thanks so much -- and keep up the good work! Pastordavid 20:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Shauna Seliy
Hi. I removed the speedy deletion tag you added to Shauna Seliy as I felt that the article asserted the subject's notability (published author). I did not submit the article to AFD as the reviews her novel has received satisfy WP:N in my opinion. Hope this is OK. CIreland 18:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Saint Sultana Makhdokh
I find it offensive that you call an article about such a great Saint nonsense. It was the story of Her life, just because it may have some things which may seem untrue does it mean you have the right to say it's nonsense? I can then say, articles about indigenous beliefs are non-sense. I would like to see that article placed back on Wikipedia, because it benefits people willing to learn about St. Sultana Makhdokh life. How dare you say it is non-sense I am ashamed at that comment. Andrew.hermiz 01:20, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

James Robson Vandalism
Thanks!! :)

User:Katebrown83 24:06, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info. I saw that the article was pretty trashed and I thought it was started like that, but I see you have reverted it back now.  Useight 07:13, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey
Thanks for the support on the Lloyd Youngblood AFD. Whstchy 00:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I knew that was going to happen sadly. Also, look at what DGG said, completely ignored what you said. Whstchy 03:02, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

re Rizzo on the Radio AfD
Dang, you're right! Thanks for getting that. Herostratus 21:02, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Reason for the Bucs seasons articles.
Per FLC feedback. See here Buc 15:55, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia
Welcome aboard to the Wikipedia online encyclopedia community. How are you liking your stay here? I hope you come back real soon.

Also, why did you delete the Talking Cats article I was creating. I understand that after the first edit (the FIRST!) that it didn't have much information, in fact it was more of a stubb than anything, but I was adding more information. Also I included enough sources (more than some other articles too) for other wikipedians to use to help shape the article.

From the sources (that is if you even bothered to look) it should be obvious that the talking cat phenominoa is a highly known thing,with videos of the cats from many places and them being shown on many teleivison programs (Including Montel WIllaims)

Again, welcome to Wikipedia and I hope you continue to make good edits here, but please refraim from deleting important articles. Sup dudes?&#91;&#91;User:Kitler005]] 16:02, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Brandon Paul Williams, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, 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 assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. 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. DarkAudit 16:48, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Away with vega
I've deleted it again and left a note on the creator's page User talk:Hindenburg62. See if the link turns blue! Tyrenius 02:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

removal of warnings
You poasted on User talk:Tlmallc, warning that user that blanking or removing dontent from that page would result in blocking. Please note tht under WP:USER users are explictly permitted to remove warnigns from their own talk pages, althogh archiving is reccomended as better practice. Thus such conduct is not blokable, and the warning was not appropraite in this particular case. DES (talk) 17:00, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * It is "frowned upon", which more or less means that a good many editors don't like it, and would change the policy explicitly permitting it if they could get consensus, but they can't. Take a look at the msg I put on User talk:Tlmallc, in place of yours. In particular, requests for blocks on the basis of repeatly removing warnings have in the past been decliend, so a warning that threatens blocking is a mistake. DES (talk) 17:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Ox in the box deletion
Neoglisms can not be deleted as being non notable, however, as this should go, I reccomend you take it to AfD. Nice to see someone else using NPW, too. J Milburn 18:59, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Katherine Grubb deletion
I decided to err on the side of inclusionism with this article. It didn't look like spam to me, and it was well written and referenced, even it was so to slightly odd sources. I think it would be completely reasonable for you to take this article to AfD to seek community consensus, but I wouldn't want to speedy delete it. J Milburn 19:16, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * If that is the case, then AfD will have it deleted. There is no harm in this article staying up a little longer. J Milburn 08:20, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Cedar Hill High School
Sick of me yet? ;) Schools are not technically speediable under notability guidelines- irritates the hell out of me, and many other editors, but it is the way it is. Again, AfD if you think it should go. J Milburn 19:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * In fact, screw it. There is no context. I have deleted it for that reason. J Milburn 19:21, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I agree, see my last message. It is worth remembering about the school thing though- my only oppose on my successful RfA was because I argued with someone about that. J Milburn 19:24, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of James J Lytle
You asked why not speedy, because I did not think it was eligible for speedy. But if that is A7 then fine with me, thanks! Stefan 06:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Your recent CSD submissions
Hi! I appreciate your amazing vigor in finding scruffy articles. FYI, I have asked two of the culprits (at User talk:Matthiasmatthias and User talk:Britisharchitecturefoundation23) to see if they can sort out their articles. When you notice patterns like this, and especially where the author looks well-meaning but unfamiliar with how we do things here, it can be worth dropping them a note. Having a bunch of work disappear all of a sudden can seem WP:BITE-ish, and ideally we'd like these people to turn into good contributors that labor with us. Thanks, William Pietri 02:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree about the astroturfing, but it may be notable work none the less. For articles contaminated by COI, the spam can be removed. I think William Pietri just above me here has the way to do it. DGG 05:01, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I have a preference for turning anything possible into a usable article, no matter who wrote it or under what conditions. At the extreme of COI on something notable, it can be stubbed. Opinions can vary about this, and the virtue of an open afd is that it provides a consensus--so you and I don't have to argue it out between the two of us. If the consensus agrees with you, that the COI shouldn't be rewarded even at the cost of a good article, they will all go out. DGG 05:18, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

re: Future pavilion
I understand. You will note that I deleted several of the other related articles as spam. I think I would be on tenuous grounds to speedy Future pavillion as spam since it doesn't overtly mention a company, and it does assert notability. I would rather process it through WP:PROD or AfD. If you are watching the other articles that I deleted, please let me know if they get recreated and I don't notice. Thanks -- Spike Wilbury  16:01, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I've put it up for AfD, showing that an astroturfing campaign is in progress. it's up to the community now. :) DarkAudit 16:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Just FYI, I've blocked the lot at Requests for checkuser/Case/Britisharchitecturefoundation23 indefinitely. Awesome work.  I am inspired to offer you:

Casagrande Labs
Hi Dark. Not only my previous SD was deleted, looks like there is an army of meatpuppets around. They are:

Britisharchitecturefoundation23 Martta1 OscarHansen 61.229.181.19 61.229.173.79 Matthiasmatthias Jurefrancetiz DrBulthaup Chichenshui

They are spreading this Marco Casagrande and his partner everywhere in Wikipedia.

Stellatomailing 02:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC) Ouch. I need to install something to get there. X-Chat you said? Stellatomailing 02:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I will let you handle it this time, if you do not mind - sometimes I get lost in the WikiBureaucracy. Btw, awesome spam killing.Stellatomailing 02:31, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey Brian, how are the Casagrande wars going? I got two articles held on speedy, not sure what you think about putting them in AfD now or later: Sami Rintala an Eero Paloheimo. Stellatomailing 15:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Comment/Question to DarkAudit:
 * Hello I started reading through the deletion notice and ended up wanting to contact you on this matter. Ironically I was searching for more information on Casagrande's recent work which I will use on an Architecture and Ethics paper I am preparing for a lecture and was surprised to see they had a Wikipedia page. First time I see this. I have only used their work through my university years to explore topics of social architecture, hybridization of architectural projects, and architectural installation work.

When I saw the page I edited some of it today. I am not a puppet. I was just adding to the stub for I could not believe how poorly the page was written. To strip down and start again - how can this be done? I see that as your suggestion. I have a lot of physical information of their work like newspapers, magazines, and other journal information. I compile a lot of written work from other architects as well. I am interested in disbursing this information for within the architecture community the topics of ethics in architecture, social concerns, hybridization of projects and other environmental/social issues are a major drive of theoretical discourse. Pitouflette 18:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)pitouflette

Thanks for the message. Will contribute in the future when the air is clear. I do have useful information which could be beneficial to other architect students. Will be happy to educate others. I do wish to ask you - where can I find the right guides (if there are any links) on how to write a correct wikipedia entry. I already started reading through the Licensing issues and the acknowledgement of references.Pitouflette 18:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)pitouflette

re Chip Ingram
Well, yes, but if he's notable enough - and a very quick google check told me that he might be - then you don't really want to delete the article, but rather rewrite it (or tag it for rewrite). Herostratus 12:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Your userpage reversion
Sorry, I missed that one. I just saw that the IP added pictures of penises to your page, reverted, and noticed a further edit from that IP. I didn't see what it was before I reverted. Obviously, even vandals are helpful... sometimes! -- Flyguy649talkcontribs 15:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Copycat?
You may have someone imitating you - username Darkaudit1 - who made a vandalism edit to Skyline High School (Oakland, California) after you reverted the previous vandalism. You want to report it or should I? Ellbeecee 01:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, done. Ellbeecee 01:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Defamatory on Articles for deletion/Tangeline.
Ah! I can't believe this another editor! --Migospia â â¥ 07:35, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Your recent checkuser request
You recently submitted a request for checkuser. A clerk has moved your request to Requests for checkuser/Non-compliant temporarily; this does not mean the request has necessarily been accepted or rejected, as clerks are generally concerned with maintenance and upkeep, not making decisions on the merit of any given request. Please BushCheney04, and then follow the instructions in the box at the top of Requests for checkuser/Non-compliant. Thank you for your co-operation. --ST47 Talk 11:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC), checkuser clerk

External Links Comment
Sorry about that, I didn't realise it was a Template and I was just a little stressy, as everyone has been picking at my Uberyl Article. > Rugby471 talk 15:56, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Re:Inconceivable
I have posted a reply to your comment on my talk page. Croat Canuck Go Leafs Go 02:22, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, DarkAudit! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page.  Â« Snowolf  How can I help? Â»  15:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Did You Know A Storyman and other hoax TV shows
I agree that things such as that do need to be verified (and in this case, deleted - and yes, I'm making a concerted effort to tag anything I find with the 'references' template these days), but often it's when a generic template is added, such as or  that brings it to the attention of the appropriate project, that has the expertise and better abilities to ferret out the nonsense than any other group. Several times I've caught items that were tagged such by others that, on the surface, looked "kosher", but myself and others in the project were able to use their history (and others, not me, their expertise in the field) to catch articles that otherwise would have gone unchallenged. I presume that's one of the reasons that the different projects exist, is to let people familiar with the subject deal with articles with which they're more familiar! I know that's how the Film Wikiproject gets rid of quite a few of these, simply by having someone tag them so we can get a look at them! SkierRMH 15:48, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Purbo T

 * The edit of was removed with a comment saying it were considered vandalism . I believe, that was an error. Another bot has meanwhile reverted the revert, so at least my bot is not alone with the wish to add this interwiki link. If you feel, adding whitespace before the interwiki links should be avoided, I agree. See also . I am always using the most recent software version, updated daily.
 * --Purodha Blissenbach owner of Purbo T 22:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Reverting HI
I was confused by the "Watt ÄÃÃ datt?" in the edit summary. I had no idea what it was, and when TW brought up the talk page, and I saw it was a bot, I got even more confused. I decided to leave the mildest template TW had and hope I was doing the right thing. turns out I was the one that goofed. When I saw the edit come back, I left it alone. DarkAudit 22:56, 5 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The expression: "(Watt ÄÃÃ datt?)" marks a disambiguation page, literally meaning "What is this?", or "Qu'est-ce que c'est?" --Purodha Blissenbach 07:57, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

what did I do
I never edited that. and your new message is stuck. 207.162.58.3 14:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You're posting what is essentially a community IP, from which many posts have come. Unfortunately, a number of those posts have been vandal posts, and what one person from that IP does, does not reflect on the previous or the next person. Even so, vandalism from an IP results in that IP being blocked, no matter who came before or after the vandal. That's why it's better to register a username. That way, an innocent party doesn't pay the price for someone else's behavior. DarkAudit 14:58, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

The Iceland biodiversity edit....
I claim responsibility for having edited the explanation for the low biodiversity at Iceland. What I don't understand is why it was immediately reverted. I simply changed a bad, even false, explanation for a true one. Common sense would tell anyone who considered it that the geological age of an island is of little interest for its biodiversity if the island has recently been covered by a several kilometres thick layer of grinding ice.

I also explained my reasons for doing this at the Iceland talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Iceland âStupid explination... ...for low bio diversity! "Its geological age -- only a few tens of millions of years -- has provided relatively little time for plants and animals to immigrate from elsewhere or evolve locally." The islands geological age is totally irrelevant for this issue as Iceland and the surrounding seas has been totally iced over several times in the last 100 000 years, wiping out every trace of life in the process. I'm changing this to The short time since the last ice over, only about 10 000 years, has provided very little time for plants and animals to immigrate from elsewhere or evolve locally. 130.243.153.103 18:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

So now I ask; do you consider this an act of vandalism and why didnât you bother to look at the talk page before reverting. Is simply anything contributed by an unregistered user considered vandalism in your opinion? If not please do explain why you think the information I edited away was right/ added was wrong. Anders Kristoffersson 212.247.216.39 22:09, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Aso consider this from the wikipedia Recent changes patrol page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Recent_changes_patrol Because no wikipedians like their edits to be deleted, it is important to leave concise but clear justifications on the talk page or in the edit summary. This you clearly failed to do. Anders Kristoffersson 212.247.216.39 22:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC) - - -

Apology accepted, gladly! I got a little irritated as it had been reverted earlier just a day after i wrote it, maybe I should ad an clear source for the time since the last ice over (I got one in my bookcase)? Although it does seem a bit silly.... Anders Kristoffersson 212.247.216.39 23:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Howdy
Yeah, I saw elsewhere that this seems to be an ongoing thing with this user. Check out this user page,they have done a good job in tracking this hoaxer. I caught him while I was doing Recent Changes Patrol... we'll just need to keep an eye out for his newest hoaxes. SirFozzie 03:34, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Just Relax
First off, I'm not "new to wikipedia", I have written nearly a hundred pages for the website over the course of the last year. Secondly, before you write things off as "nonsense" maybe you should try looking up the things you try striking down. Elleore is a Micronation in Europe that's existed since 1944 and has, among other things, a monarchy, website, been written about it dozens of books, its own stamps, and coins. May not be of interest to you, but it may be to others. Look stuff up before you consider things "nonsense".


 * Didn't look to see if the page already existed though ...See Elleore and Kingdom of Elleore lɘɘяɘM яɘɫƨɐƮ 12:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

UKNova
Why was this deleted ?

It is prominent enough to be listed on the Template:BitTorrent as a prominent site (It is now the *only* one without it's own page) and Listed in Category:BitTorrent websites where a large number of the pages are minor unremarkable sites ?

It has been mentioned is a couple of newspapers (Cites were on the page...) and not just in passing the article specifically mentioned the site and gave details about it and the community

If it does not meet the critera for it's own page would a BitTorrent websites page, that lists the best known websites would be more appropriate than a redirect to BitTorrent tracker ??

Does someone have a vendetta against UKNova ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by JasterMereel (talk • contribs)


 * You can archive this now I've calmed down ....lɘɘяɘM яɘɫƨɐƮ 15:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Requests for comment/Alansohn
Especially since I've cited a past incident in which you were involved, I thought you should be made aware of this RfC. Regards,  RGTraynor  13:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Cornelis Makkink
you mentioned on my talk page about deleting Cornelis Makkink. Sorry i haven't logged in for a while, n i don't remember what was the content. Can you remind me? Thx. Xah Lee 09:48, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * i know what it was now. It was the artist known for his erotic paintings featured in the movie A Clockwork Orange. Xah Lee 10:52, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:WclgFM.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:WclgFM.jpg. 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 02:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Avery Holton
Hi there, you tagged the article Avery Holton as CSD7. I have declined the request and suggest it go to AfD or PROD if you feel strongly. It seems to make some modest assertion of notability with sources which makes it unsuitable for CSD. Thanks JodyByak, yak, yak 01:25, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Marco Casagrande
Looks like the guy is creating tons of articles again.--Legionarius (talk) 04:09, 25 November 2007 (UTC)