User talk:MacRusgail/Archive 2

June 2015
Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Talk:The Steps of the Sun. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Neil N  talk to me 13:34, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Robert Hendrie Wilson for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert Hendrie Wilson is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Robert Hendrie Wilson until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. J bh Talk  18:21, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Sweere-arse for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sweere-arse is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Sweere-arse until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Adam9007 (talk) 00:50, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sweere-arse


A tag has been placed on Sweere-arse requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.dsl.ac.uk/entry/snd/sweir. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. J bh Talk  01:04, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Frustration
@User:Bishonen and User:NeilN

I ran Editor Interaction Analyser on the accounts User:MacRusgail and user:Jbhunley. In every case where the two have edited articles User:MacRusgail edited the article first. While not approving of MacRusgail's uncivil comments, I can understand from the tool's output (which does not include in its summary those articles that have been deleted), why User:MacRusgail feels hounded. -- PBS (talk) 20:11, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * PBS, Jbhunley has edited ~16 pages of the roughly 26,000 pages MacRusgail has edited and you can understand how MacRusgail feels hounded? What triggered this analysis? --Neil N  talk to me 21:11, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I was passing through some rugby pages which is a area that MacRusgail edits. I came to this talk page over something or other (I forget what) and noticed the page had been blanked, so I had a look at it before it was blanked, and noticed the squall. Having looked at it and, looked at MacRusgail relative absence from the ANI and other archives, I decided to dig a little deeper, to see why MacRusgail seemed to be frustrated and making what must be relatively unusual comments given the lack of ANI activity. -- PBS (talk) 21:22, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Of course the editor interaction tool is going to show he edited the articles first. He created them - but he does not WP:OWN them! The problem is that the ones I looked at were poorly sourced (There is one that he just created the article from a Wikipedia list entry and copied the errors there without checking the source. Another he just copied information from a web site and got the birth year wrong when any research would have turned up better sources with the correct information), many were completely non-notable and one was a copy-paste copyright violation , none of them were acceptable articles as they stood. The ones that could be improved were improved by other editors or by me - not that MacRusgail seems to care about that. I offered repeatedly to work with him and was told to "go crawl back under my rock" and was called a "pathetic little man". That is just what I remember off the top of my head. I am sorry he feels hounded but, from my point of view, he has been trying to use insults and complaints to attempt to bully me from examining the extremely poor articles he created. Based on what I have seen of his editing he is careless with his sources and writes articles without doing even basic research. The first article of his I saw on NPP was on a book about which the sole claim to notability was it was a 99p Kindle Unlimited book special! . He has a poor understanding of our notability requirements and our sourcing requirements, no ability to accept criticism and is completely unwilling to address issues with his articles when they are pointed out to him. Rather he goes on the attack with insults and claims of harassment.  The contributions I have reviewed, and the over the top response I got when questioning them, simply do not reflect an editor with the experience which is documented by the account history. If this is going to continue to be an issue I can document his behavior, my interactions with him and fully justify every edit I have made with respect to this editor and "his" articles and submit it to any dispute resolution forum he chooses.  J bh  Talk  21:55, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

ISBN for reference
Hi, can you add the ISBN for these books and fix the references ? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rugby_Europe&type=revision&diff=335338616&oldid=304144752. Thanks Gnevin (talk) 12:14, 27 August 2015 (UTC)