User talk:Sweet Winged One

A tag has been placed on Slut smut, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Iain99 18:28, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. WebHamster 18:55, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Marasmusine 21:33, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


 * This content is not being added; you and DreamGuy have been removing it. 71.72.73.170 21:44, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Something like six editors removed it, because it's spam. You're the only person putting it there. DreamGuy 00:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I was not the person that put (most) of it originally. It was up for months without contest, so it's the most stable. 24.210.83.241 21:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but that is nonsense logic. If someone vandalises a page, but on-one spots the vandalism for, say, a another month, does that make the revision with the vandalism on the 'stable' version because it went the longest without an edit? We are not an external link directory, we do not have indiscriminate information, we have a policy on verifiability. Each time you revert to that old revision you are replacing junk that goes against our WP:V, WP:NOT and WP:EL policies. Not only that but you are removing references that were added since, which is bordering on vandalism itself. Marasmusine 08:06, 24 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Also, so far, none of these anonymous users have responded to my query about exactly which entries in the list they object to the removal of. I'll give you another opportunity to provide me with specific examples, and again I can explain why it was removed or we can work on including it again. Marasmusine 08:22, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Since you're not going to enter a discussion about which Tetris variants you object to the removal of, are still going against concensus, continuing to place back external links (against our WP:External links / WP:Spam guides), unverified information and removing references, it's very difficult for me to understand why you keep reverting. I don't know how many times I've asked you to read the relevent Wikipedia policies. Again, here's another chance for you to tell me which entries you think belong in the list without reverting it.

PicTiles? No notability, no independent references, only an external link to their website. Spam, it get's removed. Same for Eqtris and Vertris and so on. We are (still) not a web directory. Care to elaborate? Why would you want to add these spam links again?

I'll also point out that I consider calling my edit 'trolling' a personal attack, please read WP:NPA. Marasmusine 06:46, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

RFA Thanks
  Click there to open your card! → → → Dearest Sweet Winged One, Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 96 supports, 1 oppose, and 3 neutrals. No matter if you !voted support, oppose, neutral, I thank you for taking the time to drop by. I'm a new admin remember, so if you have any suggestions feel free to inform me of them. I would like to give a special shout out to Hirohisat,  Wizardman , and  Husond , for there original co-nominations. Thank you once again and good day. Тhε Rαnδom Eδιτor

Credits
This RFA thanks was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks. So unfortunatly this is not entirely my own design.

Sockpuppetry case
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Suspected sock puppets/Sweet Winged One for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Marasmusine (talk) 08:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text below. GBT/C 11:25, 6 April 2008 (UTC)