User talk:Rtedb

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: 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 have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on. Again, welcome!--Mishae (talk) 22:07, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of Americans in Kenya
Hello Rtedb,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Americans in Kenya for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Benboy00 (talk) 00:40, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Vietnamese people in Brunei
Hello Rtedb,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Vietnamese people in Brunei for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Benboy00 (talk) 00:48, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Americans in Kenya


The article Americans in Kenya has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-encyclopedic article

While all constructive 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. GregJackP  Boomer!   16:57, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Vietnamese people in Brunei


The article Vietnamese people in Brunei has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-encyclopedic article

While all constructive 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. GregJackP  Boomer!   16:58, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Americans in Kenya for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Americans in Kenya 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/Americans in Kenya 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. GregJackP  Boomer!   18:45, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Vietnamese people in Brunei for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Vietnamese people in Brunei 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/Vietnamese people in Brunei 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. GregJackP  Boomer!   18:46, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Your new articles
I am wondering why you decided to create Vietnamese people in Brunei, Filipinos in Uganda, and Americans in Kenya all within one hour of each other, but did not put any real information in those articles. I think it would have been better to bring one of the articles up to suitable encyclopedic quality first before starting on the next one. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 18:49, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Filipinos in Uganda for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Filipinos in Uganda 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/Filipinos in Uganda 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. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 18:54, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

July 2014
Hello, I'm Jab843. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to 2014 Israel–Gaza conflict seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jab843 (talk) 14:47, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Filipinos in Mongolia
Hello Rtedb,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Filipinos in Mongolia for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. TheLongTone (talk) 14:03, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

don't revert before seeing talk page.
dude! really? consensus pretty much been reached about most sources. if you're can't be bothered to be informed about the issue, don't but your nose into it. SyriaWarLato (talk) 22:52, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

i say again, if you can't be bothered to look at what your deleting/reverting. kindly piss off. SyriaWarLato (talk) 23:00, 15 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Just looked at the talk page, and the consensus is pretty much against you, based on everyone who have commented on the discussion so far. Rtedb (talk) 23:04, 15 September 2015 (UTC)


 * check again. i pretty much convinced one the editors who reverted my edits. one other brought up a point that was proved to be false, the 65,000 civilian casualties turned out to be not WP:RS. and the last one just thinks Vietnamese government isn't WP:RS. in which he has the consensus against him. SyriaWarLato (talk) 23:06, 15 September 2015 (UTC)


 * also my newer edits are of consensus accepted info. each one is referenced. i also removed unreferenced edits from infobox. if you have a reason to revert. take it to talk page. SyriaWarLato (talk) 23:08, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

do you have a constructive reason? or do you just delete to amuse yourself? SyriaWarLato (talk) 23:18, 15 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Nope, all your major edits are undiscussed, and you are edit-warring to push your POV when about 5 other editors have already reverted you multiple times. You can't just selectively delete reliable sources, and the stable version should be kept until a consensus is reached on the talk page. Rtedb (talk) 23:25, 15 September 2015 (UTC)


 * no. i din't delete reliable sources. that's just in your little head. i removed original research(the unreferenced bolded total forces and casualties) i also proved levy's north vietnamese civilians casualties wrong(for the infobox, since it's incomplete). added new troop strength figures, all referenced. SyriaWarLato (talk) 23:27, 15 September 2015 (UTC)


 * the last guy, who deletes my edits the most, doesn't want to accept Vietnamese government as a reliable source. he won't win that argument SyriaWarLato (talk) 23:29, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Nope, everything is reliably referenced in the stable version. You are POV-pushing and deleting multiple sources with no discusson or consensus. Rtedb (talk) 23:37, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

tell me where are the references for total troops strength, or total casualties which were bolded. adding the numbers together don't count since that's original research. but of course you knew that already. also, lewy has been proven unreliable(FOR THE INFOBOX) since it gives the wrong impression on total NVA civilian casualties. so far you have nothing useful to add just want to revert for the sake of it.SyriaWarLato (talk) 23:43, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Also, pray tell. what's this supposed POV/agenda i'm pushing for? can you specify my supposed bias? SyriaWarLato (talk) 23:45, 15 September 2015 (UTC)