User talk:Szlevi

Nomination of Rainbow Broadband for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rainbow Broadband 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/Rainbow Broadband 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.  DGG ( talk ) 23:43, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Alfred Rosenberg
Please take note of this excerpt from the Wikipedia policy (i.e. mandatory for all editors) WP:Verifiability: "All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable . ... Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed . (emphasis added)" The information you added is unsourced because all you have provided is a catalog entry without any information relevant to what you posted. Therefore, I have removed ity. If you somehow think that an admin is going to sanction me for removing unsourced information from an article, please be my guest and see what happens. In the meantime, though, your information must stay out of the article until it is sourced. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:28, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * If you plan on continuing to talk to other Wikipedia editors in the manner that you did to me -- "Are you high?" -- I suggest that you familiarize yourself with WP:No personal attacks, because you'll have to defend yourself at some point.If I made a mistake, it's quite sufficient to say "I'm afraid you made a mistake" and then point out my error.  Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:38, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * While you're reading Wikipedia policies, please read WP:TPO. It lays out the specific circumstances under which it is permissable to remove another editor's comments from an article talk page. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:48, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Since you are clearly unable to even understand what I wrote AND SOURCED, I really don't care what happens to that crappy article - idiots like you make sure that people with knowledge are less and less interested to help correct this swamp of misinformation.


 * You clearly have no clue about the (Hungarian) person I have corrected (by simply adding his nationality), you either didn't even read the link or you are mentally unable to interpret it, but it doesn't really matter - you try to argue about a known Hungarian person that you don't "approve" he was Hungarian... hence "are you high" is a very appropriate question. Seriously, what's next, you will go around and demand every known person to be backed by birth certificates?


 * The fact that you are clueless shouldn't matter when there are already established facts and the fact that you don't seem to be able to even recognize them yet you are quick to undo edits instead of debating it first, well, it only shows you should be excluded from editing altogether. Whether you like the language or not, you are clearly an idiot, period.*


 * (Yes, I am using harsh words - on purpose: trying to get across the level of idiocy you are exhibiting, in case you haven't managed to figure it out on your own... I guess nuances like this get lost on you too.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Szlevi (talk • contribs) 18:48, 22 September 2017 (UTC)