User talk:Pseudomonas/Archives/2006/July

Re:Thanks

 * No problem with the help! That IP was going C-R-A-Z-Y with the vandalism of userpages (mine included) so that was a fun little diversion.  And look at it this way- you can't say you're a REAL Wikipedian if your user page hasn't been vandalised, right?  :)  Cheers! --Cabiria 00:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * By the way, my page has been repeatedly vandalised like yours, but I was able to get it sprotected for me- something that you might want to try yourself...Requests_for_page_protection --Cabiria 01:15, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you - I've applied for this. It's not the end of the world, but currently this is wasting people's time. Pseudomonas 01:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Please watch
Please watch amygdala. Thank you. Koalabyte 02:27, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Magdeburg
Hello, my Edit not was no scene because i live in magdeburg an i know it best so please not do change it i try to held the english wikipedia because i leanr english by school15:50, 30 July 2006 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.227.202.173 (talk • contribs)


 * If people remove your edits, this may be a hint that they don't belong in the article. Pseudomonas 21:35, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Stan's Deletion
i can only aplogies for my out burst i am just fustrated at deletion after i had just wrote it! and i feel that the judgment is wrong!
 * Pseudomonas, perhaps you can quote the relevant policy under which the articles were deleted, one of the criteria for speedy deletion perhaps? I think that in this case letting the author know what rule exists that is causing his/her work to be deleted would go a long way in alleviating stress because of the deletion. BigNate37T·C 23:01, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I dont understand purely because it wasnt a blog type, it isnt biased, and doesn't offend anyone —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stan1983 (talk • contribs) 23:03, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Ahh, I see, it was probably db-bio. Stan1983 would want to check out CSD A7 then. BigNate37T·C 23:13, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * BigNate37: It was originally db-bio, on the basis that there were no real claims to notability. The later speedies were all db-repost.
 * Stan1983: you're right that Wikipedia articles ought to be non-biased and non-bloglike, but in addition, they ought to be notable and verifiable. This means that people are only candidates to have articles about them when they're much more well-known than average, and the same goes for bands. There are guidlines here on what this might mean for musicians. Pseudomonas 23:18, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

then I have a further question - how do you define importance? it clearly isnt a vanity page, so therefore you claim the page is not important? Not important to who? How is that defined? They have to be VIP? They have to be dead? Your guildlines need more information - see Red Dwarf, Series 5 Inquisitor and you will see my point.....define your life - what makes you all so important that you CHOOSE to delete? Are you all of worth and such importance that you quote such wishy washy guildlines with no importance them selves? They band has been written about, have their own website, the own fans, ten albums, are genre breaking but are of no importance?--Stan1983 23:22, 30 July 2006 (UTC)