User talk:Ginbot86/archive1



HTF character articles
Do you think that the HTF main characters should have their own articles back ? We don't need all the content they had, I think just having the wikitable the articles they had before, The character bio and the trivias would do. In the list, the main characters stay there but with only one phrase and a link for their main articles. The list of characters would have the images for the other characters and each character would have their images on their own articles. What do you think ?

To answer click here

--Mr Alex (talk) 15:21, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

PS: I sent you this message because no one answered to this message in the List of characters' talk page, and also I'll reupload the images by myself, I got all images and summary contents in my computer, I can do it in a snap.

Could you please repond ?

your username
Hey, you might want to leave a little note on your userpage saying you aren't a bot; from the username people might get that idea. Ironholds 23:21, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

ThanksGinbot86 (talk) 03:09, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

14" HDD
See Early IBM disk storage. Edward (talk) 22:18, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Your rollback request
Hello Ginbot86, I have granted your account rollback in accordance with your request. Please remember that rollback is for reverting vandalism/spam, and that misuse of the tool, either by revert-warring with other users, or simply reverting edits you disagree with, can lead to it being removed. For practice, you may wish to see New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 02:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion!
Thank you for your opinion on Requests for adminship/Mixwell. I have decided that it's too early for it. I closed it by WP:Snow. Thanks! -- Mix well ! Talk 03:22, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank You!
Hi Ginbot, very very belated thanks for your support in my RFA, which passed by an embarrassingly wide margin, there's a full glitzy Oscar style version of my acceptance speech here. Your comment "I think you'd make a good admin." was most kind and I hope I don't disappoint you. So far I've only really been getting involved in CSD which has boosted my experience in content building.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  22:57, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of FAIL Blog
A tag has been placed on FAIL Blog 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 about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable

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 page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. —  Dæ dαlus Contribs  07:13, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of FAIL Blog
I have nominated FAIL Blog, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/FAIL Blog. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. —  Dæ dαlus Contribs  22:06, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Happy birthday
Have a great birthday, Ginbot86! Good health, and good luck! — what a crazy random happenstance 17:07, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Funhaler


The article Funhaler has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * non-notable commercial product

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. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Brianyoumans (talk) 08:04, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

WP:DENY
Hi Ginbot86. I noticed you gave IP user 75.89.233.205 several warnings (here and here for vandalism. This is all fine except for the fact that you included "STOP ADDING THE MOVIE SECTION TO HAPPY TREE FRIENDS". and "THERE IS NO HAPPY TREE FRIENDS MOVIE. YOU'VE BEEN BLOCKED ONCE FOR ADDING FRAUDULENT CONTENT. IT'S ABOUT TO HAPPEN AGAIN".  Please don't feed the trolls.  This is exactly the reaction vandals are attempting to exact from Wikipedia users and you're playing right into their hands (see WP:DENY. In the future, remember to deal with vandalism from a neutral standpoint. I understand you may be frustrated with the vandal but this is not the right way to express your anger. -  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 03:54, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Ginbot86 (talk)

RFA
Just so you know, you supported Explicit twice at his RFA. Could you please remove one of them. Thanks. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 05:40, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Whoops, thanks for reminding me! Ginbot86 (talk) 05:43, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

3RR
Hi, I see you exceeded WP:3RR in reverting what you considered spam, at Civil defense siren. Unfortunately there is no exemption from 3RR for spam reversion - it needs to be dealt with without breaching 3RR, eg by bringing others on board. regards, Rd232 talk 09:43, 2 November 2009 (UTC)