User talk:Slgcat/Archive 1

the F-N-C word is real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! STOP DELETEING IT

The F-N-C Word
In the first episode or pilot. the Michals created a combonation of bad words and called it a frankenstein word. This word was the "F-N-C" word. The word is f*cking n*gger c*nt. Then they changed it to mother f*cking n*gger c*nt. After that they put another word into it so it was changed to f*cking n*gger c*nt nazi. Nazi was added to make sure the Germans were not left out in such a frankensteinish word. Finnaly they decided to change it to f*cking n*gger c*nt nazi unicorn. Unicorn was added to make the word good at the end, "like a news story" as Michael Ian Black stated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.30.181.231 (talk) 07:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Chris Murphy (Canadian broadcaster)
Hello Slgcat, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Chris Murphy (Canadian broadcaster) - a page you tagged - because: The article makes a credible assertion of notability, sufficient to pass A7. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Closedmouth (talk) 10:13, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

do you like tacos?
okay enough of that i demand you stop removing my edits cause they are constructive and you are being very very mean 09:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)09:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)09:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.61.39.70 (talk)

What the...
Are you stalking me? And undoing everything I'm doing? How very thoughtful of you...asshole. Please stop. And get a life. thank you and have a nice day with a smile on that pretty face :)68.61.39.70 (talk) 09:22, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

July 2009
Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia.  R ad io pa th y  •talk•  03:40, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Kidswirl
Thanks for your note, and I'll give you advice if I can. My experience with pages like this, where it gets recreated, is -- if I feel the content is liable to make a useful article if all the deficiencies are addressed -- I try to work with the author to see if I can make him/her aware of what needs to happen. In this case, for example, what's missing (as it so often is) is reliable sources, so I would leave a personal note on the user's talk page pointing to that policy and offering help. I have to say that that's in a perfect world when I'm in a good mood, BTW. What sometimes happens is that I just keep tagging it and leaving the templated note on the user's talk page -- after all, they are supposed to be reading this stuff, but I find that a bit bite-y and try to avoid editing when I'm in that frame of mind. In very rare circumstances when I see that there's something there that I think needs to have an article created, I'll take over, search and find references, add them, delete anything spammy, etc. This particular topic seems as though it could possibly be useful, but it has problems with both advertising-like content and lack of references; you can continue to tag it, as a minimum, or improve it if you feel like it. (I have to say that leaving it sit in the hope that someone will improve it is not terribly responsible... sometimes people try to bring articles like this to the attention of a user who's interested in rescuing articles.) If there's anything further with which I can be of assistance, please don't hesitate to contact me; I'm at your service. Accounting4Taste: talk 22:47, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Cluedo
Just wanted to say thanks for the Cluedo userbox, which I've copied from your userpage. It made me smile and that was a great start to my day. (We have more than that in common; I'm an ex-Mensan and a science geek.) Accounting4Taste: talk 14:34, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Re:Brickell Bay Office Tower
Hi Slgcat. I usually work with files from an administrative standpoint so you have asked in the right place. I took a look at the images of Brickell Bay Office Tower and found files File:Brickell bay office tower.png, File:Brickell bay office tower 2.png, and File:BBOT Logo.jpg to be copyvios. However, these images have been uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons so I have tagged the images so that Commons administrators can delete the files. There seem to be no problems with the other images - although they may be possibly un-free. However, doing a Google search, there is really no evidence to suggest that so I'm going to assume they are free images for now. Hope that helps. Best,  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 03:54, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Ceroma
Hello Slgcat, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Ceroma has been removed. It was removed by Phil Bridger with the following edit summary ' (contest prod - this has encyclopedic content beyond a dictionary definition) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with Phil Bridger before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 23:05, 3 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Nick Hoogz page deleted
Gday Sophitessa, the page was an example of dry Australian humour, and all the Oz IP addresses doing the editing. Probably took another Australian to see it for what it was. I have speedy deleted it. -- billinghurst (talk) 11:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

YCSU Young Democrats
Thanks for bringing that to my attention; since the articles were located at different titles, I hadn't noticed that. I've reviewed the deleted article, and I don't believe that the versions are substantially identical; most obviously, the new version has far more sources. Additionally, note that the G4 that you originally affixed to the article is only for articles that have been previously deleted through a deletion discussion, such as those that occur at WP:AFD. Being speedy deleted does not make reincarnations of an article G4-eligible, though of course subsequent versions should theoretically be speedy deletable on the same bases as the original one. I hope this addresses your concerns; if you still believe that the article should be deleted, please feel free to list it at WP:AFD. Best, Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 19:30, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Sandra Sakata
Just dropping you a line to let you know I commented on the proposed merge—I support it. I would do a redirect myself since there seems to be a consensus at this point, but since you brought up the issue, I'll let you take care of it, in case you wanted to transfer any info from the other article first.  Mbinebri  talk &larr; 16:11, 26 September 2009 (UTC)