User talk:Robtencer

Need help?


 * Questions — a guide on where to ask questions.
 * Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.
 * Wikipedia's 5 pillars — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations
 * Article Wizard — a Wizard to help you create articles
 * The Simplified Ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.
 * Guide to Wikipedia — A thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia.

Userspace drafts
Hello. I noticed from your comments on the talk page of Stunmedia.com that you were trying to "edit the article in DRAFT mode". Wikipedia does not have a draft mode per se; however, you can create a page in your user space by titling the new page as follows: User:Robtencer/newpage where "newpage" is the name of your new page. Once the draft is complete, you can move it to the main article space using the move function; note that you will need to wait four days and make ten edits before you can move articles. See WP:Userspace draft for more information.

Stunmedia.com
I moved Stunmedia.com to User:Robtencer/Stunmedia.com on your behalf. Feel free to contact me if you have any other questions on how to edit Wikipedia. –Grondemar 23:43, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Buzzhollywood.com
I've moved the page to User:Robtencer/Buzzhollywood.com, which is a subpage of your userpage, so that you'll be free to work on your draft, without fear of speedy deletions; however, before continuing, please read WP:WEB. Salvio ( Let's talk 'bout it!) 23:44, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The X Factor Fan Site
A tag has been placed on The X Factor Fan Site requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web content. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. NtheP (talk) 19:26, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Hairhorn (talk) 21:53, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content. Blank pages can confuse readers, and are overall not helpful to the Wikipedia project; furthermore, blanking a page is not the same as deleting it.

If the article you blanked is a duplicate of another article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalized, please revert it to the last legitimate revision. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please use the appropriate deletion process. Falcon8765 (talk) 20:26, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The X Factor Fan Site
A tag has been placed on The X Factor Fan Site requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web content. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Derild 49  21  ☼  22:56, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Mind explaining this edit?
This one? I removed the empty category per categorizing pages guideline. Specifically "An article should never be left with a non-existent (redlinked) category on it. Either the category should be created, or else the link should be removed or changed to a category that does exist." Mauler90 talk 02:00, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Dear Mauler90, verified facts are very important to my wikipedia article. establishing dates and ownership are important, because thexfactor.com are being vandalized, hacked, and sent letters to give up ownership. I hope this explains why I wanted to keep the RED highlights.Robtencer (talk)

Articles for deletion nomination of The X Factor Fansite
I have nominated The X Factor Fansite, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/The X Factor Fansite. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Mauler90 talk 02:14, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Other editors have edited and removed what was bothering you: i.e. categories that lead nowhere, please remove your nomination, for delete

Dear Mauler90, I have become very defensive, because unlike yourself, admins have made speedy delete tags on my work, without discussion. If you are willing to discuss the matter, I would be most appreciated. Perhaps you have not read the article, and don't understand the significance or importance of a FANSITE. Robtencer (talk)
 * By all means. Make your case at the Articles for deletion/The X Factor Fansite and if you can convince other editors that it should stay it will.  I would more than happy to see the AFD closed as Keep, we can always use more good articles in the Wiki!   Mauler90  talk 02:28, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Also it looked like you were a bit unclear on how an AFD works. It will be listed there for 7 days before an admin decides whether or not to delete it based on user input, so you have plenty of time to improve it before it is in danger.   Mauler90  talk 02:33, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia: Etiquette

 * pls do not post rude or hateful comments as you did here. This is the type of think that is not acceptable here perhaps you should familiarizes yourself with Etiquette. Moxy (talk) 06:38, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

It's okay
Hello Rob, I saw your comments at Articles for deletion/The X Factor Fansite, and I'm sorry that you've been made to feel persecuted. You asked for help, and I wish I could provide it. I take pride in protecting new articles by new editors from deletion. Unfortunately, in this case I don't see anything I can do. Notability (web) requires:
 * "The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself."

This doesn't seem to be the case. If it's any consolation, it's not your fault: no matter how skilled an editor you are or how much effort you expend, some articles just can't be defended. Also, please keep in mind that there's no need to stress over a single AfD. It can feel like you're under a time limit, but really you're not. Even after an article is deleted, if you discover new references that would have saved the article, you can always take them to Deletion review to get the article re-created. Good luck, Melchoir (talk) 07:07, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Re: The X Factor Fan Site
Re your message: Please be careful in your use of the term "vandalism" (follow that link and read it), labeling deletions as an "attack", or stating "vandalist admins" are after you. Your comments such as this and this are also unnecessarily combative. Such language is borderline incivility.

The reason that your article was speedy deleted and appears to be heading for deletion on the AfD is that you have not established why the site is notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia. Having a website related to a notable show does not make the website automatically notable. In other words, notability is not inherited. You must show how the website itself received coverage from reliable sources, not that the X Factor show received coverage, therefore the website is notable.

Finally, it appears that you have some relationship to the parent company of the website. Therefore, please review the conflict of interest guideline and the Wikipedia Business' FAQ. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:51, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I glanced at the article, and am certainly no expert but so you will know, the problem involves several things and I will list some not in any order. I am taking this time so you might understand and not be upset. A person might just be trying to advance an agenda or might end up, if not turned off by what could be seen as failure, a good editor. The comments you received are actually per Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Wikipedia:Notable listed as WP:N is a fundamental starting point for an article.


 * #1)- There is an order in starting articles. Some are in areas that will get attention immediately and some more quickly than others. I have not looked into your type of article. I realize that you are working on it. Listed here you should have 7 days to still work on it and try to solve the problems listed, if possible. WP:NOTSOAPBOX is serious. There are places to look to learn and get an idea on do's and don't's. The first is in order. a)- Why was my page deleted? especially #What not to do about it, What you can do about it, and if you have an article that consensus proves not a Wikipedia type article research, If all else fails, try another wiki. Please: You can not "vote to keep" on every entry for delete. It is not actually a vote anyway. A decision is derived from a consensus of persuasive comments and a closing administrator weighs these and makes a decision. This can be challenged by asking for a review. Note, So you will not be confused, if all comments have valid points, then in a way it could be considered like a vote, as the consensus would be weighed accordingly. There is Wikipedia reference to WP:votestacking (but not exactly accurate and should probably be changed to something appropriate), so repeated entries are disruptive and why it is stricken. b)- Look at What Wikipedia is not, WP:Notable, WP:Sources, policy and other Wikipedia standards and guidelines along with those listed concerning your article. The more you learn (if you want to) the better equipped you will be.
 * #2)- Read up on the proverbial weapons you can use. Articles can be started in a soapbox. If you have questions see; WP:Help desk.
 * #3)- Please understand that there is far more to actually do than there are editors and time. This usually means there is a back-log every day. Look at the back-log for this AfD.
 * #4)- Understand that there is not just editors with one job. Those that help out here usually have many other things they do, projects, articles, and a very long list of other things (and the more knowledge an editor gains the less time he/she has because of getting into new areas), so asking for help here, from editors that can not possibly stop on every article for longer than is absolutely necessary to look over the article, look at issues, do some research, read the talk, make a decision, and comment, is not conducive to actually getting any help. Many that do comment follow the article and follow up on comments received. This can be very time consuming.
 * If your article has a chance it must be notable and encyclopedic to start. An article (or a new variation of a previous one) involved in a WP:Speedy delete for certain reasons will face the same criteria. If it fails this time you have to research. I stopped and looked at the article. It is not in my area of interest. It has merit on some points but is lacking a lot.

Note:: You could consider editing into the already established article The X Factor (UK). I would seek consensus (and maybe help} from principle editors on that article or risk deletion. You can merge info from your article into an established one easier.
 * Concerning your article you may have issues. I gave suggestions but don't try to beat a dead horse if you know what I mean. Get some editing of other article of interest under you belt, if you have interest in this, and (of course) if you article is deleted try later with experience. Just so you will know--I ask for help setting up my user page in the beginning. The tag is still there. I still am not familiar with soapboxes and edit live or with Microsoft Word. Hey! we all learn at our own pace and I feel I have made significant contributions.
 * Please be civil. There is no one out to get you (well that is possible but an editor or admin caught doing this risks serious sanctions at WP:ANI) so if you plan to go farther investigate. I would reply to the warnings with apologies and on the AfD page. Personal attacks are serious and all editors should assume good faith. For the record my first article suffered deletion with a re-direct. Since then I have made major contributions and started articles on Biography, National Register of Historic Places, Roads in OH, TX, an LA, and rewrote some to the point of being a major contributor such as Kisatchie National Forest, as well as many others, with no deletes, re-directs, or Merges. I just determined I didn't like that so dot all my I's and cross all my T's. Don't mean it won't happen--just hasn't. My first didn't make it but not bad for a truck driver.
 * I understand your frustration but please be patient. Getting all worked up will either make you leave or get banned. Neither will do any good in the long run. Some editors I have come across do not have visiting personalities and can seem curt or uncaring at times. Sometimes this is not the case. If you plan to go any farther with things on Wikipedia I would reply ( to each instance or on the AfD with apologies. No one has anything against you personally and assuming good faith, as well as personal attacks, are big deals.

Good luck. Otr500 (talk) 10:34, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I hope things work out and that I helped in some way. I am sorry your article is not one in an area of my interest or knowledge. I did notice, other than notable sources, that the intro did not mention things like where the main office is etc...

I was advised by another editor that I duplicated comments and I certainly did. I edited to remove these for clarification. Also I recently encountered the term "votestacking" which conflicted with what I commented on concerning the above, "It is not actually a vote anyway." Since discussions are not actually considered votes to editors that would certainly be confusing. Also, my comments are how I view what I read and anything that seems to conflict should certainly be questioned. In view of this, and my discussion with another editor, I may investigate a name change of "votestacking" to be less confusing. In my defense I did mention that I am not an expert and I apologize for the duplication and my unclear (or incomplete) comments. I do hope I have helped and please overlook any possible duplications I might have missed. Otr500 (talk) 15:13, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * can an admin kindly move my article into a soapbox for me? I have much work to accomplish and edit before the article could be saved. Your help is kindly requested. Thanks --Robtencer (talk) 19:59, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Sockpuppet investigations/Pyknic56 for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. — Jeff G. ツ 21:29, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * In response to Jeff G (smiley face) I have only 1 account and only edit with my account--Robtencer (talk) 19:52, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * In response to Jeff G (smiley face) I am a member of wikiproject x factor and notified other members of a biased attack against a new wiki editor, that does not know the intricacies that an advanced editor or admin, does.--Robtencer (talk) 19:52, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I have downgraded the attack to admins flexing their muscles, by quoting rules, that new wiki editors would not have immediate knowledge of, unless notified and indoctrinated on such a large scale as was done for me. Thanks for your notifications. Got any more, that would help me become a better editor in the future?--Robtencer (talk) 19:52, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Robtencer/The X Factor Fan Site
User:Robtencer/The X Factor Fan Site, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Robtencer/The X Factor Fan Site and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Robtencer/The X Factor Fan Site during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Leaky Caldron  21:29, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Robtencer/The X Factor Fansite
User:Robtencer/The X Factor Fansite, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Robtencer/The X Factor Fansite and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Robtencer/The X Factor Fansite during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Leaky Caldron  21:31, 31 December 2013 (UTC)