User talk:Divinearmor

Proposed deletion of Bristol Regional Women's Center


The article Bristol Regional Women's Center has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Spam.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 21:01, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
 * This isn't spam--it's an attempt to harass the physicians. JJL (talk) 23:07, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

ANI
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Stalwart 111  (talk) 04:57, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Bristol Regional Women's Center


Please do not make articles about a living person that are entirely negative in tone and unsourced. Wikipedia has a policy of verifiability and any negative information we use must be reliably sourced, and our articles must be balanced. Negative unreferenced biographies of living people are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Nathan Johnson (talk) 05:20, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

October 2012
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent disruptive editing. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 12:30, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

This blocked user ( [ block log] | [ active blocks] | autoblocks | [ unblock] | contribs | deleted contribs | [ abuse log] ) has had their talk page access revoked because an administrator has identified this user's talkpage edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. If you would like to make further requests, you may contact the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-appeals-en@lists.wikimedia.org. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice. Kinu t/c 16:16, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Darn it, now I'll never know what Divinearmor meant by that crack about my "articles". —Tamfang (talk) 19:19, 30 October 2012 (UTC)


 * (edit conflict) FYI, the reason you were blocked is that you are clearly here to push an agenda of your own. The fact that you think that I have an agenda is clearly a case of psychological projection; you have no idea what my political affiliation is, nor does anyone else on the page. The fact is that you went and created a page with an attempt to make the subjects look bad, by pretending to represent them, when actually your purpose was to expose their names to the public for the sake of mob justice (ironically, much in the same way that Proposition 8 opponents went and exposed the name of supporters in an attempt to scare them off or even see injury to them). The fact that you're unable to see why this is a problem leaves you incompetent to edit Wikipedia, and you will remain blocked as long as you are here to push an agenda.
 * If you are some day able to recognize the problems in your actions and become wholly repentant of them, and will change in future, by all means email me and we may unblock your talk page to allow for a second chance. But please don't bother if you're just going to keep defending the indefensible. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 19:22, 30 October 2012 (UTC)