User talk:Zpeopleheart/Archive 3

Name confusion
Hi Zpeopleheart. I am confused by the last message on this page which is signed u|Dataking231. Are you using two user names? Or maybe Dataking placed this edit here by mistake?--Ipigott (talk) 13:09, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I am not sure what you are confused about? Dataking left a message here on my talkpage in response to a post I left on his/her talk page. I just have one account. Zpeopleheart (talk) 14:51, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you!!
Hi. Thanks heaps for your message. Yes I am so happy I managed to make this page I tried my best to make it good quality and I found other users contributing. I am such a big fan of this artist. He is growing a following here in my town. :) What did you like about it? Also what is the tea house invitation? Dataking231 (talk) 01:18, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2015
Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Bella Hadid, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. 47.55.183.206 (talk) 00:09, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Bella Hadid. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can 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 you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. 47.55.183.206 (talk) 00:09, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Esquivalience. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Brandon Calvillo, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Esquivalience t 02:40, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

A7
Thank you for patrolling new articles. I would just like to remind you that A7 only applies to articles that don't credibly (i.e. plausibly, doesn't have to be verifiably) indicate that the subject is significant. Examples of credible indications of significance include "X person is known for his/her contributions to stem cell research" and "X organization is the fifth-largest conglomerate in the world". Examples of non-credible indications include "X website has been visited by 10 billion unique people (the world population is seven billion)" and "X person (born ) has fifty honorary degrees from colleges considered the most prestigious in the world." (they are extreme examples, and they may be considered disruptive promotion or even vandalism, but just for the sake of example.)

I had to remove your A7 tagging of Brandon Calvillo because, while it does not automatically confer notability, the claim of "5.4 million followers" does count as a credible claim. Nonetheless, if you encounter articles that have insufficient sourcing (like that one), search for sources online on Google News/Books/Scholar. If you can find several sources that cover the subject significantly, s/he is notable and the article can be kept as long as there are no other problems, if not, you can use proposed deletion or articles for deletion (AfD is preferred as PROD is only for cleaning up years-old articles patrolled in the hope of sourcing for notability).

Just keep the above in mind when you patrol. Happy editing! Esquivalience t 02:48, 22 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note. That same article was successfully speedily deleted earlier in the day.

"(Deletion log); 21:15 . . Ponyo (talk | contribs) deleted page Brandon Calvillo ‎(A7: Article about a real person, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject)"

When I saw the article was recreated with the same content, I nominated it for speedy deletion.

Thanks for the explanation. Zpeopleheart (talk) 02:55, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Bore
You declined my speedy of Abubakar Usman Gurbin bore, but compare log history at Abubakar usman Gurbin Bore. Including this title, the article has been deleted at least five times across different locations from different sysops, so even if there is some "significance", there is definitely something else about this, i.e. hoax, CoI, etc... Jared Preston (talk) 21:26, 24 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I restored the speedy. I mistakedly declined it. Sorry. Zpeopleheart (talk) 23:29, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Stubs
Hallo, Please take care not to add stub to an article which already has a specific stub template, as you did here: it just wastes other editors' time. Thanks. Pam D  22:42, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Swpb. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Soil regeneration and climate change, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. —Swpbtalk 20:52, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of LUZ AYDA


A tag has been placed on LUZ AYDA 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 credibly 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator.  Velella  Velella Talk 09:42, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:11, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:13, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:14, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Administrator Assistance Request
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. SanctuaryX (talk) 00:14, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration Notification
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Arbitration/Requests/Case and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted in most arbitration pages please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by SanctuaryX (talk • contribs) 22:49, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2015
Your recent editing history at Black Lives Matter shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Stabila711 (talk) 06:52, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Siege of Baghdad (1743) See above too
Greetings. At least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been or will be reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you.

I am sending you this friendly reminder because you have been making many hasty edits that are creating difficulties for other editors, as noted in the many complaints on your talk page above and the one you removed here: Furthermore, you are again and again, without any explanations or comments, making questionable changes and deleting tags as in: Siege of Baghdad (1743). If you noticed, the author of this article on your own talk page informed you that the article was an error! I value your help on Wikipedia, and thus my friendly note.

Best.

MarkYabloko ''' 07:07, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

P.S.: You are quickly, within minutes, removing notices and warnings from your talk page too, supposedly for archiving, as you did here:. Assuming Good Faith on your part, your actions, nevertheless, are precluding other editors, myself included, from making a productive effect. Thanks once again.

Best,

MarkYabloko ''' 07:20, 19 November 2015 (UTC)