User talk:War wizard90/Archives/2014/December

AfD nomination of List of drum corps
An article that you have been involved in editing, List of drum corps, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/List of drum corps. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? JimBurnell (talk) 20:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Days of 47 logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Days of 47 logo.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 08:04, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Parade-cat-float.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Parade-cat-float.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 09:05, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Days_of_47_parade_band.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Days_of_47_parade_band.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 08:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Parade-cat-float47.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Parade-cat-float47.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 09:56, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Drum corps
Glad to see you're really throwing yourself into working on the drum corps activity! However, I do have a couple of concerns. First, notability of drum corps. Wikipedia has notability guidelines on a lot of subjects, Notability (music) and the proposed Notability (organizations). All items in the list should be notable, which might mean some corps can't cut it as they aren't verifiable. We then have the problem of trying to figure out which corps can be verified and can't, a simply mammoth task. Secondly, following this, there's almost no information on some corps. If you're using corpsreps for your guide (which I assume you are at least in part) there are many defunct corps with no corps history, no current website, and no information to write a Wiki article on except for their repertoires and location. Finally, and this one is a nitpick, I think the Drum Corps Wikiproject agreed, at least for now, that the naming convention for articles is "XXX Drum and Bugle Corps." The current list currently links to articles that may share a name with a corps but aren't corps themselves. I hope you'll reply either here or on my user page, I'd like to talk with you about this further. Mr Bound 01:24, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Please cite sources
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Tech N9ne, but we regretfully cannot accept original research. Please find and add a reliable citation to your recent edit so we can verify your work. Uncited information may be removed at any time. Thanks for your efforts, and happy editing! Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 06:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Incorrect Notables?
Didn't you watch NBA back in November? On route to 52 points, kobe scored 11 fgs in a row. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=261130013 --Twlighter 22:05, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Connect-A-Pedia
I see your point about the article, but it is well known and popular in Australia and I believe I was the first person to think of it in 2002 and was definitely the only one to file a patent ($1500) in 2003 which was just granted 2 days ago. But, I see where you're coming from and are not resentful of you, just the deletion policies, Thank You.

NASCAR
I just check the NASCAR site, and his sponsor is is 360 OTC. The only thing that has to do with WrestleMania is that 360 OTC is also the official sponsor of WrestleMania 23. TJ Spyke 21:16, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You are correct and I apologize. I thought WWE was the NASCAR sponsor, not the event itself. Thank you for pointing me in the right direction to find the information. B mg 9 1 6  Speak to Me 16:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It's okay, I understand. I'm constantly getting frustrated with users blatantly ignoring warnings in pro wrestling articles and continually find it hard to AGF, but somehow I do, no harm done. I have also let the other user now that you were right and pointed him to the specific site on the driver where it blatantly states Wrestlemania is a sponsor. Take care. B mg 9 1 6  Speak to Me 19:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * There has been some confusion on Michael Waltrip (or as you wrote "Michael Waltip [sic]"), and Ja7yski, according to his site, lists him at zero, and that has been confirmed by NASCAR. Additionally, he's still 27 points in the red. NoseNuggets 1:45 AM US EDT Mar 27 2007

IVANHOE (software) and other new pages by User:Nowviskie‎
If this software article deserves a db-tag, then there's a string of other pages that this user created that probably deserves the same treatment. I db-bio tagged this user's vanity article‎, but I wasn't sure about the rest of the list, so I left them alone. Thanks. Finngall 18:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

He was totally right to delete the empty article on my name (which I added before I understood how user pages worked), but I feel strongly that the stub articles describing software and academic initatives in my field should be left to stand so that others can expand on them. They are right in line with other articles I could name on academic software tools and initiatives. Please give me guidance on making these articles better, rather than just deleting them. Nowviskie

Fair use rationale for Image:Image:Jesus is Magic.jpeg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Image:Jesus is Magic.jpeg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 21:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Hidden Stash III.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Hidden Stash III.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:27, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:ArticCircle.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:ArticCircle.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Joint Venture.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Joint Venture.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:43, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:High Society.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:High Society.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:02, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Carl_Edwards.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Carl_Edwards.jpg. 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, then 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, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. 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 Fair use, 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 uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:43, 29 February 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 20:43, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Ron Paul
I was certain I seen it on CNN (this morning), that Ron Paul dropped out. Oh well, I've been wrong before. GoodDay (talk) 16:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah ha! I see. GoodDay (talk) 16:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The Washington Post is reporting he's dropping out, today. GoodDay (talk) 17:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, it's only reporting the same Paul statements from last week. PS- I wish the congressman would be more clearer on what he's doing. This I'm sorta still running stuff, is very fuzzy. GoodDay (talk) 17:37, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source/license for Image:SLIGHTLYSTOOPID.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SLIGHTLYSTOOPID.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like PD-self (to release all rights), (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 15:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

KMK wiki
contact snr@suburbannoizerecords.com if you're interested in helping us with KMK's wiki -- we want to make it better. thanks! (btw we hook friends up that help us)

Proposed deletion of Predictive index


The article Predictive index has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Poorly sourced promotional 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. Logical Cowboy (talk) 16:35, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

June 2014
Hello, I'm Kangaroopower. I wanted to let you know that some of your recent contributions to User talk:Logical Cowboy have been reverted or removed because they could be seen to be defamatory or libellous. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=613336961 here].  Kangaroo  powah  21:13, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for attempting to harass other users. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Yunshui 雲 水 10:20, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

WP:BOOMERANG rebuttal
I would like to point out that I said that after I had already asked this user to stop reverting my edits and instead he did not respond and just deleted my comments from his talk page, he then went and found a completely separate article I created over 1/2 a year ago a nominated it for deletion. This is obviously harrassment. Just because I made angry comments to one ignorant user, does not make me uncivil. When my negative comments were reverted I instead issued a warning template for harassment to logical cowboy, and asked him to please cease and desist with harassing me, next thing I know I've been blocked. Also, I was never notified by anyone that I was being considered for blocking, this is a direct violation of Wikipedia's policies. How can a user be blocked when the correct procedures have not been followed? I should be allowed access to pages that Logical Cowboy is trying to delete in order to contest them including Hunter Industries, Predictive Index and Mobile Electronic Certified Professional. Articles should be rewritten to follow Wikipedia's standards not just deleted. I thought the purpose of this website was to provide information, not delete as much information as you can. EDIT: As you can see the user has now found another article I created SEVERAL years ago, and is nominating for deletion, is this acceptable behavior on Wikipedia now?

Speedy deletion nomination of Mobile Electronic Certified Professional


A tag has been placed on Mobile Electronic Certified Professional requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from https://web.archive.org/web/20071021080720/http://mecp.com/about_mecp.asp. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Logical Cowboy (talk) 20:49, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

WP:BOOMERANG again
Looking at the editor's contributions, I can see no sign that he contacted me twice or even once before he called me a f**, a f*****, an a******, a d*****, and said he wanted me to die on my talk page. Maybe I'm missing something--were these "civil" contacts deleted? Not that it would be an excuse for the grossly offensive material. Logical Cowboy (talk) 22:21, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I was offensive ONE TIME, I will attempt to find the previous comments and post them here. War wizard90 (talk) 22:24, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Update: I could not find the comments I left on Logical Cowboy's talk page, meaning he may have never saw them. Not sure what happened, I did some edits on my phone and using the mobile editer proved to be difficult at times, perhaps I unintentionally did not leave those comments. I did leave the following comments before the block was requested, however, which cleary show my intent and show that I thought I had previously left comments

"I have already asked you once to add reference needed tags or improve articles yourself rather than just reverting changes, news sites ARE credible sources whether you think they are or not. After I asked this of you, instead you hunted down another article, this time one I had created, instead of one I had edited, and proposed it for deletion. This is considered harassment. If you continue your current style of editing I will submit you to be blocked. I have added Predictive Index to the list for reinstatement. I assume you will not continue to demean my work by deleting for no other reason than you don't like my edits enough. You are not contributing to the community in a positive way, if you would like to talk about like an adult, please respond, don't just hunt and delete all my edits. I'm sick and tired of it, seriously, I've been a contributor for YEARS longer than you, and have never been treated with the disrespect that you have shown." War wizard90 (talk) 22:30, 19 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Yeah, you wrote that just after you said you wanted me to die and all the other stuff. Maybe you should withdraw your unblock request now, because it is based on false information.  Logical Cowboy (talk) 22:34, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Sir, why are you taking such a personal concern with me? Please stop harassing me, I will leave you and your talk page alone if you leave me alone. You saw that I was willing to fix the page you just nominated for deletion and did so anyways. I said I wrote that after I wrote the original negative comments, that is not false information. And it clearly shows that I thought I had left you a civil comment at least once before. If I didn't that was an accidental misstep on my part, either way I don't like your style of editing. And I still think you should be more open to adding reference tags rather than just reverting edits. My contribution history shows that I give a honest attempt to make good, credible edits. If you had just added reference tags and asked me to fix it in the first place, I would have. Why do you feel the need to go around deleting everything I try to contribute to this community? Like I said, in years of using this website I have NEVER had another user treat me this way. Your style of editing discourages new users. I apologize that I got angry and made some negative comments, but I'm over it and would just like you to leave me alone now, whether or not you decide to change your editing style. Congratulations, you won, you got what you wanted, no reason to continue your harassment. Thank you, War wizard90 (talk) 22:42, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Shevon Silva
Sir, Standard metre and metre are two different things as same as Standard kilogram and kilogram. Please study the unit history.
 * , The burden of proof is not on me, but on you as the creator of article. You need to show why the article meets WP:N, and why it should be a separate article from metre, rather than a redirect, or a subtopic of the metre article. If you want recreate the article and add those references and include some more details, rather than just one sentence, I will not nominate it for speedy deletion again, however, other editors may still do so if it does not meet all of Wikipedia's standards. Cheers War wizard90 (talk) 02:27, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

SWC
1st The UBF Swc And UDF Sws are not in a dictionary because they are not widely known there private. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ColnelUSBF (talk • contribs) 05:41, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Regardless, all articles on Wikipedia must meet Wikipedia's Notability standards. Also, all articles must at least meet the standards of a stub in order to avoid being deleted, one sentence with zero references will cause an article to be deleted every time. Also, recreating articles that were previously deleted is frowned upon. War wizard90 (talk) 05:45, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

There is no puffery in the content, only objective information. Again - this is to be informational only and not a marketing vehicle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zfierstadt (talk • contribs) 02:34, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

You lied
You told me I could dispute the deletion tag you added to Studio (TV series), which is clearly not the case and you never stated how or why you classified the article as web content. Which in itself is stupid given YouTube, Hulu, Crackle, Netflix and other all are web content sites as well as having a number of web only series on them. You should go and tag all of those articles as well. Or stop policing and judging articles by double standard guidelines. helmboy 21:50, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Once an article is nominated for speedy deletion an administrator can delete the article at any time, whether you have disputed the deletion or not, I did not personally make the decision to delete the article, only admin's can do that. Obviously the deleting admin agreed with meet that your article did not meet WP:N, Hulu, Netflix, YouTube, and Crackle are all clearly notable, whereas "Studio" is virtually unheard of. Please familiarize yourself with What Wikipedia is not and also with assuming good faith, before accusing other users of, as you put it, "judging articles by double standard guidelines." Finally, the issue is not that the article is web content, web content is allowed as long as it is notable, I assumed it was web content since you originally name the article "Studio (Web series)" and later changed the name to TV series. If you have further concerns about why the article was deleted, I'm sure the admin who deleted would be happy to explain to you why he deleted it. War wizard90 (talk) 23:38, 16 December 2014 (UTC)


 * So you think only a commercially backed web only tv series should be the only exception to your interpretation of the no web content rule?!? Also the speedy deletion tagging seems highly questionable when there is no debate or reply to a dispute comment.  If you continue to use the tagging the way you are you are just going to just make editors either leave or just remove your tags.  Also technically a web only series should NOT be titled as a TV series as TV series denotes a traditional broadcast or cable series.  helmboy 23:50, 16 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Also are a War wizard because you are the best at edit wars???? helmboy 23:52, 16 December 2014 (UTC)


 * You obviously aren't listening to what I said, web content IS allowed on Wikipedia, as long as it is notable, you provided exactly ZERO references to support the notability of this completely unheard of series, any deletion discussion by the community would have reached a consensus to delete this article. If you would like to provide references to the community showing that it meets notability guidelines and should be included in an encyclopedia, there would be no problem with recreating the article. And in regards to my username, even though you are just trying to attack me, if you must know I came up with when I used to play Warcraft III back in the day, before Wikipedia was a twinkle in anyone's eye. My edit history clearly shows I do not get into edit wars, replacing speedy delete tags is not considered edit warring. War wizard90 (talk) 00:08, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Insiduous Urban Records
Hey Wizard, Thank you for reaching out and being concerned about making Wikipedia the best it can be. Let me start by saying that this is my first foray into the experience of writing for Wiki, and although I have been using it for many years, and I feel like I understand the tone of sobriety required for the site and database, I am sure I will learn to refine my work as I learn the decorum. That said, I am just trying to finally get around to filling in this page among many others relating to indie hip-hop circa 1995-2004. There are few people with the knowledge or experience to do this. This was my first page and I need more time. ...I was getting it started, so although it feels incomplete. I tried for now to make it an overview. Is there a way to make it a draft not for the public? It seems like any information is better than a stub. I also started linking it to the acts it was associated with that otherwise have stubs on their pages. True, I am the producer who started the label, so if it feels to subjective, how do I make that better? Just not include my name? I do care a lot about this genre of music and especially the artists; my actual involvement is really not that important to me, but to some it might be relevant. I also intend to fill in the difficulties and failures of the label and early history of many relevant bands and labels. Well, there it is. I am hoping you can help me, rather than shut me down... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4XampL (talk • contribs) 07:39, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
 * You can create drafts in your sandbox, the link is at the top right of the screen. As far as writing objective articles, I do not create many new articles myself, mostly I just patrol recent changes. However, you can visit the Teahouse, which is a resource for new editors to get help and suggestions creating articles. They will be able to offer much better help than I could. Cheers, and good luck with future articles. War wizard90 (talk) 01:12, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Incorrect recommendation for the deletion for Calibre(unit)
Mr. wizard90, I know Wikipedia is not a dictionary. I created this article using the information I have. If you want, you can improve this article. There is no place in Wikipedia directly mentioning this unit. Without unnecessarily jumping into new pages and just looking at the appearance of the page without considering the future contribution, do not tag articles to delete. I did not include just a dictionary definition here. Read the article and its content carefully. Try to improve it. Try to publish a research paper at least and learn about articles. Best wishes for your future inspections. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shevonsilva (talk • contribs) 05:05, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
 * What makes this unit of measurement Notable? Every page you create is just a dictionary definition from the same source, rarely used or defunct units of measurement do not meet Notability requirements in my opinion. If the community disagrees they can vote to keep the article and will abide by community consensus. However, I am not obligated to do the research for you to prove that this should be included in Wikipedia. Also, new articles must at minimum meet the requirments of a stub, which is another concern about this article. Finally, it seems from your edits that you are simply copying a dictionary, which is copyright infringement. War wizard90 (talk) 05:40, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

From Shevon Silva

Two mis-judgements are here. This article about this unit will have a reference to future UK linear measure units system article in particular related category. For that I have to research it further or other authors can create the particular unit system article in future. Wikipedia users may inquire this particular unit, for example for conversions too. Minimum requirements issue: I purposely broke down into small headings in order to provide enhance improvements for this article.

Copyright infringement: This is totally your guessing. If I directly copied something it will be in quotations. Contents were written by me. I included the references in required places correctly. There are derived informations too. Refer the articles carefully.

I recommend you to study the content carefully and to identify auther's purpose before recommending something.

Best wishes for your inspections.


 * Have you actually bothered to read the Notability page? Have you bothered reading What wikipedia is not. Your article clearly falls in the latter category. Can you provide any references besides one encyclopedia that specializes in units of measure? There is absolutely no notability on this subject as far as I can tell. You saying that it will have a "reference to future UK linear measure units" is not verifiable or reliable, you need to provide secondary sources, and you need to give more than a measurment and conversion? What makes this subject important? You are completely ignoring all of these questions. Every article you create has this same issue. The only reason I'm not tagging all of your articles is because I'm waiting for the community to reach a consensus on this one, before deciding how to proceed. PLEASE familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's guidelines before creating any more new articles. As you know, I am not the only other user who has seen issues with the articles you've created. War wizard90 (talk) 06:19, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

LatestReports208: Wizard, I used reliable resources and also I am new, so excuse me if I have incorrect information or I do not follow Wiki's rules. This edition is based on my article: "2 Police Officers Shot" — Preceding unsigned comment added by LatestReports208 (talk • contribs) 06:01, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Macquarie Street Ninja
They might be just a some hood really. A criminal. But he or she has been mentioned again by a federal lawmaker some two years on. I dont think this 'legend' of the NSW legislative council is ever really going to die. Are you sure we cant have an article on the ninja?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnWayneCourier (talk • contribs) 12:35, 22 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Per Wikipedia guidelines, people known only for one event, do not meet notability guidelines (see: WP:BLP1E for more info.) War wizard90 (talk) 23:36, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Dirty checking speedy deletion
hey there, don't really dispute that the article was to short. I intended to start a stub, because this is a topic that is really common when talking about client side JavaScript templating and live updating. The term is often used but never defined, and I was hoping that by starting the stub people would find it when they are writing articles that use the term. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wutevermam (talk • contribs) 01:18, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

HOW TO CHANGE USERNAME?
Pls help to change username as well as how to avoid getting policed over something that is proved to be perfectly fine over the years on wiki here - in other words we only wish to document our software here on wiki and have nothing to do with advertising it (good examples of what articles you have on wiki and follow format-wise is wordpress and roman atwood) - you have such articles approved for years and we do not intend to do anything else but to document us just like they did - best regards, WW, keep up with great joba and thanks for everything! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nash Operating System (talk • contribs) 04:10, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Making the new page
I am sorry for making the new page that wasn't significant. Will I get in trouble for this? I promise not to do it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YumaMan9 (talk • contribs) 04:16, 23 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. You will not be in trouble, however, before creating anymore new articles, you may want to visit the Teahouse, for help with creating articles, and with learning Wikipedia's policies. Thank you. War wizard90 (talk) 04:39, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Careful with tagging
Hi. Regarding this edit, please be very careful when tagging articles for deletion. A quick search on Wikipedia or via a search engine would have indicated that the subject is notable. It's incredibly demoralizing to both new users and old users alike to create an article and then—within minutes—have it be unjustly nominated for deletion. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:29, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I disagree, a quick search on Google shows nothing more than a facebook page and a few minor "tour dates". Can you provide any reliable sources that establish WP:N? Either way the original editor did not include any references outside of the bands own social media. I did search before tagging the article for deletion. War wizard90 (talk) 05:32, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Update: Looks like they now added a few very minor sources, though I'm still not convinced it would pass a deletion discussion in afd based on those sources, but I'll let someone else nominate it, if no one else agrees that they are not notable, I don't intend to fight an uphill battle. War wizard90 (talk) 05:37, 23 December 2014 (UTC)


 * (edit conflict) Hi. I'm not really sure why you put quotes around the phrase tour dates. This search alone seems sufficient to invalidate a speedy deletion argument. The band may or may not be notable enough to warrant inclusion here and you're free to start a deletion discussion if you feel that would be appropriate. I don't think a speedy deletion tagging was appropriate. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Well we will have to agree to disagree, I did a quick Google search and didn't see anything apparently significant stand out on the first few pages so I nominated it. The editor contested the deletion, and was given the chance to fix it. I think the system worked just how it was supposed to, I suppose I could have a waited longer to tag it, but with out references cited someone else would have likely done the same thing. Like I said, not sure if they are notable or not, but not worried about it enough to start a deletion discussion myself. (BTW, I put "tour dates" in quotes for lack of a better term for a random listing of minor shows). War wizard90 (talk) 05:58, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Random Deletion Orders
War Wizard90, I do not think you are using good reasons for ordering deletions. As soon as I created my article, you sent an order and then called my article a hoax. I assure you, I used reliable info to support my facts. Also I am new, so excuse any ignorance. One question I have is: Are you an admin? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LatestReports208 (talk • contribs) 06:06, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Help????
How do I prevent my page from being deleted? Danny Lee Duncan is an important member of We The Kings. Why does he not get a page when the bassist Charles Trippy does? --Wethedlv (talk) 06:29, 23 December 2014 (UTC)Wethedlv

Slow down your CSD tagging a bit, if you don't mind
Hi there,

I helped Adorabutton get The Railbenders out of the way for a couple hours to fully assert notability and save it from CSD tagged deletion. I came here to follow up on that article rescue, but I noticed the great number of contests about speedy tagging you've done in the past few days.

I have plenty of experience here, I've nominated my fair share of articles for deletion, and I've deleted over 5,000 articles. What I have learned in the process is that if I get a string of complaints about how I am evaluating articles, I should probably re-evaluate the standards and thresholds that I am using. I'm not saying you are right or wrong about tagging any specific article, I just think it would behoove you (and probably reduce the un-fun part of working on Wikipedia) if you take a bit more time in evaluating new pages using Page Curation and reduce what might be false positives. There is no deadline and if in doubt you can always revisit a page the next day to see if it still needs speedy, prod or AfD.

Keep in mind that most of these articles are created by new users, and keep in mind that despite having to work through the lens of scrutiny in reviewing new pages that we are still to assume good faith and use patience and caution paired with hesitancy, tempered by discussion.

Thanks for the New Page patrol work, keep it up, it's vital to maintenance. Let's just keep the people in mind, eh? Templates are not helpful or informative, they are convenient for us. Please keep that in mind :) Happy editing. Keegan (talk) 07:05, 23 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I'll slow it down, most of the disputes are new users not understanding the policies and I usually try to respond to them with the relevant policies, to help them understand. However, I understand where you are coming from. Obviously, more than one editor has taken issue with articles I've tagged, so I cannot fight the entire community. I will try to be more objective in the future. Luckily, the holidays are coming up and I wont be too active over the next few weeks, so that will be a nice cool off period. Cheers. War wizard90 (talk) 07:13, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Enjoy your holidays, and thanks for considering this constructive criticism. Your contributions toward keeping the encyclopedia tidy are greatly appreciated and valued; counter-vandalism work is where I cut my teeth as have so many others and it's a whirlwind of pages, policies, and posts. We're lucky to keep up. Contact me any time if needed. Keegan (talk) 07:55, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Agent F.O.X
Hello War wizard90. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Agent F.O.X, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''This is not about 'a real person, individual animal(s), organization, web content or organized event', so A7 does not apply. The film exists, so this is not a hoax either. If you feel this should be deleted, propose it for deletion, or take it to Articles for discussion. Alternatively, improve it so it can remain on Wikipedia.''' Thank you.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 09:36, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Kaffeine Coffee Deletion?
It has true merit in the up and coming third wave coffee scene in indianapolis, just as stumptowm etc. please leave this page up as it is one of my favorite coffee house. They also do good with the yearly contributions to africa — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aistear220 (talk • contribs) 05:29, 24 December 2014 (UTC)