User talk:Gammaware65

Your question at Fastily's talk page
Hi. I happened to see your question at Fastily's talk page. I'm not sure if Fastily understood your question, as he seems to have been assuming that you created the article and were challenging its deletion. That's the only way that the link he provided to you makes sense to me, anyway. :) If you would like access to the deleted article, you can make your request at Requests for undeletion. I believe that there's a pretty good chance an administrator will help you view the content, under the circumstances. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:46, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion ! I'll do. 151.66.238.25 (talk) 19:38, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

After writing a reply at WP:REFUND, I looked again at at Fastily's talk page, and saw that below his reply User:Fastily/E you wrote "Is that an answer?" Evidently you did not understand that it was a link to a pre-written answer, and Fastily's intention was that you should click on it and read this: "'Although it may have not been your intent, your article read like an advertisement. On Wikipedia, we have a policy in which advertising/spam is subject to on-sight deletion under speedy deletion criterion G11. Please note that articles nominated for deletion are judged on their own merit, and not in comparison to other articles. You are welcome to resubmit your article, but please ensure that the revised text is compliant with the policies and guidelines described at WP:ADS, WP:MOS, WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:POV, and WP:GNG; otherwise, you run the risk of having the article deleted again. Once you have resubmitted your article, you may find WP:RFF helpful; the WP:RFF noticeboard has many editors who are more than willing to give you constructive criticism on your article and/or help edit your article.'" Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:24, 12 September 2011 (UTC)


 * John, as his note at Fastily's page indicated, he didn't write the article. The article was created in 2003 and had 95 edits at the time of its deletion. He was asking to see the article so he could understand what was wrong with it. I'm gathering that Fastily may not have understood that. In any event, User:Ironholds restored the content to article space already, so this one seems to be resolved. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:02, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did understand what he wanted, but owing to the mis-typed title at WP:REFUND I couldn't find the deleted article. I now see from the history that it was mainly contributions from one user, which spammed the article to the point where it was G11-ed, and Ironholds restored the pre-spam version. I also see with alarm that Crisscutfries is working on it again, but at least he is doing it in user space and has asked for advice, which I do not have time to give right now. JohnCD (talk) 22:11, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay. When you pointed him to Fastily's text, I thought you had misunderstood, since it's intended for the article's creator and didn't really answer the question. The mistitle at WP:REFUND is a bit odd. Not sure how that happened, User:Gammaware65, but somehow you asked for a different article altogether. :) I don't really have time to give feedback to User:Crisscutfries, either, but I'll suggest he ask for it at WP:COIN. Gammaware, sorry for highjacking your talk page. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:03, 12 September 2011 (UTC)