User talk:John from Idegon/Archive 3

Mazda6
Vandalism? The Shinari is concept car only, not the 6 replacement. I don't see any evidence to suggest the CX-7 is/was a replacement for the 6 wagon, considering the wagon is still in production and the CX-7 is discontinued. Mykeathome 8:48, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Idaho SH 71
Nice work so far. You seem to be using the same process that I use to create articles. That is, do the infobox and junction list first and then do some writing later. 28 miles isn't too long to write about. I'd say one long paragraph or two average paragraphs under a  heading should do fine. As far as history goes, I have an atlas from 1947 which says the road existed as a graded road, but it wasn't called SH-71 yet.

Anyway, so far, so good. If you have any questions, let me know. –Fredddie™ 23:16, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

PS: you can use my checklist to see what else needs to be done. –Fredddie™ 23:18, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * You might also find WikiProject U.S. Roads/New user orientation helpful. This will provide you an introduction to the structure of our road article and the U.S. Roads WikiProject in general. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 23:23, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

New assignment
Dear Gtwfan52,

A new adoption assignment has been assigned to you. Please view the assignment on your adoption page and complete it as soon as you can. If you no longer wish to receive these notifications, please remove the  from your adoption page (located at the top) and click here to place the adoption page on your watchlist.

→ B  music  ian  05:21, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * hey there. Have you finished the assignment yet? ;) → B  music  ian  14:09, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

RE:Could you look at something for me and advise?
You've done nothing wrong here, but I'd like to make two points. Otherwise, your actions are all right. Cheers, → B  music  ian  04:17, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * This isn't exactly vandalism - you're right that edit was against policy, but it didn't seem like an attempt to intentionally hurt the encyclopedia.
 * You could have wrote a stronger rationale for this PROD, possibly like "Major contributors have a conflict of interest and there are no reliable sources to establish notability" - and don't forget to base your PROD rationales on established policy.
 * Your final assignment is also on your adoption page. → B  music  ian  04:20, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Robeson
Hi, I responded to your criticism on the Robeson page. If you do a full and fair reading you will see I hate editing the intro because that's for smart people, not me. But what that person did was bad. The intro has stayed dormant for at least 6months. Best regards. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:30, 12 May 2012 (UTC)


 * You are right. I was wrong. I just never dealt with blatant vandalism before. I got flustered. I should not have wrote what I did. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:50, 13 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I struckthrough the ownership stuff I wrote. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:53, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your kind comments. Life has forced me to take a break from the Robeson article. The problem w the Robeson is that the best editor/watcher of the article, User:Malik Shabazz seems to have become uninvolved. And the 2nd most active editor, User:Itsmejudith has become tied up. And the reality is, I am the 3rd most active editor and I am just not very bright. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 01:53, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

An award for you!
moved to userpageGtwfan52 (talk) 23:02, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The link is on your adoption page. It's at the very bottom. → B  music  ian  08:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * "The test is here... good luck". "Good luck" is the link to the exam. → B  music  ian  08:27, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

An award for you!

 * About the "more lessons" thing... I create new lessons from time to time... there's only two lessons that you haven't done (1 which has become mandatory). I can substitute those lessons on your adoption page if that is what you like. → B  music  ian  09:17, 15 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Please do. Gtwfan52 (talk) 09:19, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ Enjoy. → B  music  ian  09:27, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!
I know its been a while but I only just added it.

Sheohar Lok Sabha Constituency
Please refer the Parliament of India website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.161.114.199 (talk) 05:20, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Eagle Ridge High School
Hello Gtwfan52, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Eagle Ridge High School, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to schools. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:45, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Complaint about deletion
The edits I made to Henry Foss High School where in most, correct. I go to that school, and I saw no sources for what was up there (much of the information already up is incorrect), so I'm sorry if I didn't cite sources. I do however wish to know why you even care, you don't live in the same area, or go to the school. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mew5436 (talk • contribs) 16:12, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Insecurity Insight
Many thanks for helping out with Insecurity Insight. I added a couple of things on the article's talk section and would appreciate if you can take a look. Griberg 16:29, 28 May 2012 (UTC+2).

Grid format
Definitely not an A7 candidate. It's not web content, and it's not people or a group of people. (Or a named animal...) I can't see a CSD category that fits it. The idea may already be in an an article somewhere, but if it isn't then references should be sought. I've tagged it unreferenced in the mean time. Peridon (talk) 12:39, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Little Princess School
Hello Gtwfan52. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Little Princess School, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''A1 only applies to "very short articles". See WP:CSD.''' Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 19:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Because it fails the notability guidelines, I have PRODed it. → B  music  ian  08:15, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Flawless logic...
...at Talk:Ferrari dental clinic. You made my day. --kelapstick(bainuu) 09:36, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Regarding recent tagging
On a recent article about a band, you placed a speedy deletion template on it, then placed six cleanup tags on it immediately afterwards. Two of those tags, blprefimprove and blpunsourced, were not only completely redundant to each other, but erroneously placed in the first place, as an article about a band is not an article about a living person. I'd encourage you to read WP:OVERTAGGING and remind yourself of why tags are placed on articles, and how sometimes they may not be helpful. You should probably also re-review WP:BITE and WP:NPPNICE, as shoving that many tags on the article within three minutes of it being created isn't in best practice.  elektrik SHOOS  (talk) 10:25, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your input, but I disagree. Until the instruments learn to play themselves, BLP policy most certainly does apply.  Bands are made up of living people, and in the particular article you are talking about those people were children.  The username of the creator of the article was almost the same as the "band's" management agent listed in the article.  And the article consisted of 90% biographical information on the 13 year old girls that made up the band.  "Biting" the creator of this article (which, by the way, I don't see tagging as being included in the definition of the term) while not good policy, is not where the intent of the policy lies.  Do you think that they are here to improve Wikipedia?  Doubtful. If you would have looked you would have seen that I deleted one of those redundant tags shortly after posting it.  By the way, the powers at speedy deletion disagreed with you too, as they deleted the article under A7.  Actually, what you have done here is closer to "biting the noob" than what you have accused me of doing.  I am all for constructive criticism, and gladly appreciate any advise given, but in this instance, you are wrong.  I do thank you for your time tho. I have reviewed two of the three articles you suggested, and I will read overtagging momentarily.  Have a  pleasant morning.  Gtwfan52 (talk) 15:07, 31 May 2012 (UTC)