User talk:PoliticalAnimus

I have tried very hard to work with you people. If I don't post info, someone gets pissed off. If I do post information, someone else gets pissed off. If I don't post a link to the info I am using, someone gets pissed off. If I do link to the info I am using, I get an IMBECILE like this idiot "Xbot" who removed the link, so now I am back where I was, so some other idiot can criticize me for not linking to the source of the info.

So, now I am asking to have a decision made: either leave me the f__k alone to write this s__t FOR FREE to add to you site, or tell me to leave so I can find some other place to post my s__t where someone will appreciate it for once. You people are pretty f__king prissy for people getting crap for free.

So, make your decision...do you want this crap done right or not? If you do, leave me the hell alone. I have written 15 books on these subjects, and I don't need criticism from anonymous imbeciles who don't have a life.

If you don't want my stuff, tell me so I can stop wasting my damn time on you dimwits. Okay? Okay.

I await your comment - and your decision. Until then, I am not going to waste one more second on your site.

BTW, whatever your decision may be, I have one piece of advice for all of you: grow up, for God damn's sake.


 * Please note that every single one of us contributes for free. There are no paid editors on Wikipedia (well, there aren't supposed to be, anyway).   You're welcome to contribute information, but you must do so according to our policies, guidelines, etc.  For example, I just saw your most recent edit on Archibald M. Howe.  You removed a set of 3 maintenance templates, 2 out of 3 of which are problems that the article still has.  Until such time as those problems are fixed, the templates have to stay on the article.  This isn't an option--these templates exist so that other readers and editors can see the problems, and, hopefully, fix them.  The bigger problem, though, is that Wikipedia is a collaborative editing environment.  These means that you have to be willing to work with other editors under the framework of our rules.  This is no different than the fact that you can't just walk into your publishers office and say "My next book will be round instead of square, in 40 point type, and include no footnotes.  Because I'm an expert, and I know best."  Just like your publisher, we have rules about how our information has to be formatted, presented, etc.  Furthermore, by definition, editing on Wikipedia means that other editors are going to come in and alter, remove, or add to information that you write.  If you aren't able  or interested in such collaborative work, then Wikipedia probably isn't the place for you.
 * Also, please note that Xbot is a bot--that is, it's not a human being, but an automated computer program that keeps out links to certain cites that have been deemed unacceptable by the Wikipedia community. The specific link you tried to add was to imageshack, which is a site that we specifically because it has been used for Spam by many many users (I'm not saying you did, but that is how it has been used in the past).  As a general rule, self-hosted image sites won't ever qualify as reliable sources, so you'll need to find some other way to verify the info.
 * If you want help, and are willing to stop the name calling, I am happy to help find a way to channel your expertise into value here at Wikipedia. If you only want to do things your own well because somehow you're entitled to deference outside of and beyond our rules and community norms, than we're sorry to lose your help. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:22, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Swallow, Silas Comfort


A tag has been placed on Swallow, Silas Comfort requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. 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 belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — 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 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 that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. Sp33dyphil "Ad astra" 06:57, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Removing Speedy at Swallow, Silas Comfort
- SDPatrolBot (talk) 07:06, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of John Russell (prohibitionist)


The article John Russell (prohibitionist) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * questionable notability

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Aunty-S (talk) 19:42, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited John Russell (prohibitionist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Black (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:45, 22 February 2012 (UTC)