User talk:Is this bass really strong enough??

Speedy deletion nomination of Vanessa Arbuthnot


A tag has been placed on Vanessa Arbuthnot requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, 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.  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 17:41, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Vanessa Arbuthnott


A tag has been placed on Vanessa Arbuthnott requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, 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. De728631 (talk) 17:53, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. De728631 (talk) 18:01, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

March 2010
This is the only warning you are receiving regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to Christopher Scarver, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Stillwaterising (talk) 18:16, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Christopher Scarver. 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 several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Stillwaterising (talk) 18:20, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing; we invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism and are immediately reverted. Please stop; If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Stillwaterising (talk) 18:21, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Your editing privileges have been suspended for 31 hours
for. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Removing the AIV report? Wow, that really almost got me, because no brainless vandal had ever done that before... You have only been blocked for 31 hours because I can't quite believe how stupid you are - and am giving you the opportunity to prove it when the block expires (unless you are really really stupid with the unblock request). Of course, you might make me look an idiot by coming back and being a useful contributor, but... you are the moron who thought removing the AIV report would get you out of trouble. LessHeard vanU (talk) 18:25, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I think this user might be a sockpuppet of User:Ln of x who is banned from Wikipedia. They've made edits to Lorna Fitzgerald and East Hunsbury just as other sockpuppets have, and the username is sort of in the style of something Ln of x would use. However the edits aren't the usual Ln of x stuff so I couldn't be sure. anemoneprojectors   talk  19:04, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


 * The creation of a Blink-182-related article now confirms to me that this is the banned User:Ln of x, and I have blocked them indefinitely. anemoneprojectors   talk  19:21, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Blink-182's Sixth Studio Album


The article Blink-182's Sixth Studio Album has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Pure WP:CRYSTAL speculation

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. -- Boing!   said Zebedee  18:56, 22 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I've reviewed your edits and there is sufficient similarity to convince me that you are the banned User:Ln of x. Even if you aren't, your editing can hardly be considered helpful. As such I will be revoking your talk page and Wikipedia email system access. Please direct any further appeals to the ban appeals subcommittee via the process outlined there. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:57, 22 March 2010 (UTC)