User talk:Kevin Green342243

Welcome!
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:


 * [[Image:Crystal Clear app ksmiletris.png|23px]]  Introduction
 * 5     The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * [[Image:Crystal package utilities.png|23px]]  How to edit a page
 * [[Image:Crystal khelpcenter.png|23px]]  Help
 * [[Image:Crystal Clear app ktip.png|23px]]  Tips
 * [[Image:Crystal Clear app ksokoban.png|23px|]]  How to write a great article
 * [[Image:Crystal_Clear_app_kedit.png|23px]]  Manual of Style
 * [[Image:Nuvola apps konquest.png|23px]]  Fun stuff...

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Leebo  T / C  18:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

WP:A
I noticed in your edit summaries, you are using this policy to remove large chunks of articles. Note that there is a difference between "attributable" and "attributed." Just because something is not attributed doesn't mean that it's not attributable. Rather than remove large sections of text without discussing your changes on the talk pages of the articles, you could consider looking for sources to attribute the information. An exception would be negative or libellous information, which should always be removed if it's questionable, but if it's not, then try to find sources first, or ask on the talk page. Happy editing!  Leebo  T / C  18:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Ricky Steamboat Edits
Hello! And thanks for your work on Wikipedia. As a matter of policy, sections of articles where sources are not cited are not deleted; they are tagged with the following tag:

It is much preferred if you use this to note text that need proper sources. Please do not delete content until a consensus is reached about that content on the talk page of the article.  κaτaʟaveno TC 20:34, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Reverts
As you have not discussed any of your edits today you will find most of them will be reverted by memebrsof the WP:PW. Anything I revert will be on my watch list and if you insist on blanking content rather than discussing it then I will revert it again. Add and OR tag or Ref tag if you feel an article need improving. Deletion is not helpful, discussion is. Darrenhusted 23:07, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

A few members of WP:PW have been going through articles recently to source them. If you simply add the tag, then they will get to sourcing the info eventually. Peace, --  The  Hyb  rid  23:14, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

An Automated Message from HagermanBot
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 23:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Stop
What you are doing is counter-productive. WP:PW exists to fix the mistakes in wrestling articles. It has been decided that rather than blank the articles, as you are doing, members will go through and find sources for the info. Please stop what you are doing immediately, as you are getting in the way. --  The  Hyb  rid  23:29, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I have read those many times, and what the project is doing will make a better article then blanking them. WP:IAR gives us permission to do what we are doing for the good of the articles. They will all be sourced soon, and we won't let one editor stand in the way of that. --  The  Hyb  rid  23:32, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I didn't threaten you, nor was I incivil. I agree that something about an arrest needs to be sourced, but you cannot blank the entire section over it. --  The  Hyb  rid  23:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I beg to differ, The Hybrid. What I have seen is this user removing unsourced negative content in biographies of living people, per WP:BLP. Keep up the good work, Kevin. The Hybrid is right that it's better to remove specific bad material than to blank whole sections, though. Mak (talk)  23:37, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * If we don't know what the info is, then how do you expect us to source it? WP:PW is working on it, just like we are supposed to. However, we need our space to be effective. If either of you would like to help find sources for the information, then you would be more than welcome to, but interrupting a project drive that is making good progress is very counter-productive. --  The  Hyb  rid  23:41, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

That would be much appreciated, and I'm glad that we could work this out. Peace, --  The  Hyb  rid  23:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I know that you weren't trying to, and all of the claims that you make are legitimate. You were obviously editing in good faith, and all of us can respect that. Peace --  The  Hyb  rid  23:44, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Take note of the fact that what is happening here is the exception, not the rule. What you did is the right thing according to Wikipedia policy, and it is very rare for any project to make a WP:IAR call like this one, and it looks like the project may end up being overruled on this one. Peace, --  The  Hyb  rid  23:56, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry but I totally don't understand what you mean. (I'm confused)  Kevin Green342243 23:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * What he's saying is that you are correct, but a project that works on wrestling biographies has decided they get to ignore a very important rule. There is a policy called Ignore all rules which says that if the rules stress you out too much, just edit the encyclopedia in a constructive way and it will probably be fine. It doesn't apply in this case. Mak (talk)  00:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * If we can get the same result faster, then we should have every right to do so. --  The  Hyb  rid 

Speedy Delete Tags
Hi Kevin - I have read the to and fro' you are having above. I understand and approve mostly of your point and the point made by Mak. Uncited material can be removed - however - I do not think that putting a Speedy Delete tag on an article like for example you did on Rafael García is the correct way to move on this. The article clearly needed a clean up (which you did) but it did assert (perhaps badly) its notability. At worst it may have been put up for WP:AfD. By spending a couple of minutes finding a simple reference - adding a reference sub-heading, and leaving the stub tag on and it can become a short mini-stub worth keeping. The problem is that when you tag them as Speedy Delete you set up work for Administrators who are trying to clear through a backlog of these requests when many are not actually worthy of speedy. Perhaps if you just have a look at WP:CSD and the AfD process? Anyway please keep up the good work of removing all material in Wikipedia that is not attributed to a reliable, published source - but watch the deletion request use a little more closely please.-- VS talk 12:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)