User talk:Spaofvictim

Welcome!

Hello, Spaofvictim, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Patrick John Wee Ewe Tee, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

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 helpme 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 Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Cind. amuse  06:51, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * 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 Patrick John Wee Ewe Tee


A tag has been placed on Patrick John Wee Ewe Tee 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 a person or group of people, 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.

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 hang-on 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you.  Cind. amuse  06:51, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:10, 30 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not a place to right great wrongs. Please keep to objective, neutral facts and avoid creating coatrack articles that are vehicles for criticism.  Acroterion  (talk)  04:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

My thoughts exactly. This site is objective and neutral; please don't use it to air your grievances. This is an encyclopedia, not a blog, social networking site or message board. I knew full well what I was doing in reverting your edits. If I hadn't done so, another administrator surely would have. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 05:23, 30 December 2010 (UTC)


 * By the way, I agree that the reverted version is not ideal, but it definitely shouldn't be used as a place to air grievances.  Acroterion  (talk)  05:27, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Public demonstrations in Singapore, you will be blocked from editing. Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Public demonstrations in Singapore was changed by Spaofvictim (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.902475 on 2010-12-30T14:19:13+00:00. Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 14:19, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Spa closures in Singapore


The article Spa closures in Singapore has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * blatant soapboxing

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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Wuh Wuz  Dat  17:17, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Patrick Wee Ewe Seng


A tag has been placed on Patrick Wee Ewe Seng, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.

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 hang-on 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Wuh Wuz  Dat  17:19, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello there, I have reviewed this nomination for speedy deletion and I think there is (just) a sufficient claim of notability. Your original text says "Patrick John Wee Ewe Seng is the recipient of the Asia Pacific Most Promising Entrepreneur Award in 2007 (Asia Pacific Entrepreneurship Awards 2007 (Malaysia Region))." If you can find a suitable source for this assertion the article might stand.


 * However there were a number of other problems. Many of the sources you cited were in fact other Wikipedia articles, which is not permitted. We have to go outside the pages of WP for our sources. I have removed all the material for which there was no source, as we have to follow these guidelines very carefully with biographies of living people. Moreover, I can see from your other edits that you seem to be using WP as a kind of tool in a campaign you are currently involved with. This is definitely not OK and any edits you make to any articles here will need to be scrupulously balanced and well sourced. Please note that other editors will be watching your contributions to make sure this is the case.


 * If you can find the source for the Entrepreneurship Awards please add it in here as soon as you can. If you have any queries you can simply reply here. Kim Dent-Brown   (Talk)  22:24, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Spa closures in Singapore for deletion
The article Spa closures in Singapore is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Spa closures in Singapore 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Wuh Wuz  Dat  17:25, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:630 spas wind up in first 10 months of 2010.jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:630 spas wind up in first 10 months of 2010.jpeg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 17:48, 10 January 2011 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 17:48, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:630 spas wind up in first 10 months of 2010 - 2.jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:630 spas wind up in first 10 months of 2010 - 2.jpeg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 17:49, 10 January 2011 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 17:49, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

January 2011
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Lim Hng Kiang. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful, then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Wuh Wuz  Dat  06:54, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Public demonstrations in Singapore, you may be blocked from editing. Wuh Wuz  Dat  07:04, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Patrick Wee Ewe Seng


A tag has been placed on Patrick Wee Ewe Seng 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 a person or group of people, 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.

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 hang-on 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you.  Cind. amuse  22:58, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Declined. Article asserts notability which is sufficient (though this needs substantiating with a reliable source quickly.) Kim Dent-Brown   (Talk)  23:19, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Patrick Wee Ewe Seng for deletion
The article Patrick Wee Ewe Seng is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Patrick Wee Ewe Seng 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Wuh Wuz  Dat  06:44, 12 January 2011 (UTC)