Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Mike Beltzner

Jenna/Ottava

 * Moved from AFD
 * There is only a difference in being discussed and being mentioned when you are trying to delete an article because you think that AfD is a revenge platform against someone that Wikipedia Review stirred you against. My dear, you are violating Point. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:15, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Look, first of all, don't call me "dear" unless you want me to call you "princess". Second of all, everyone knows that my purpose on this project is to fix the BLP problem. So while you're on your pointless crusade against WR because you're sad about getting booted off over your extreme views and trolling, I've got work to do here on WP. So take your bad faith and baseless claims elsewhere. And while you're moving along, go read POINT so you know the policies you feel inclined to throw at people. لenna  vecia  17:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm confused as to how anyone can know that you care about BLP when you have spent the past couple weeks going after people who were mentioned at Wikipedia Review. Seems a little odd. Is it my fault that you have posted on just about every major topic at Wikipedia Review and then act on it here? And then whine when someone points that out? Point makes it clear that your disruption is inappropriate. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:39, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Your claim is demonstrably false and it is you who is disrupting the process. Get over WR and go be productive. لenna  vecia  17:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Cut it out, both of you. The closing admin should be aware that the participation here is affected by being linked from WR, but they are still allowed to comment. --Apoc2400 (talk) 17:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * By demonstratively false, you just happened to post in a thread dealing with FlyingToaster's RfA, attacking it, pursuing it, and when it passed participating in the actions of another thread that sought to attack her contributions? Sure seems like a hate campaign that you are 100% involved in. You do know that it also qualifies as the verify definition of wikistalking in addition to a point violation, right? And then you had the audacity to move comments in an AfD that you started, as if CoI didn't apply to you. Odd how you keep violating all sorts of standards here in pursuit of one person. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:15, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

How about this, Ottava. Because I think you're just trolling, and you keep claiming I'm violating all these policies, you have two viable options, maybe three. 1/ Take it AN/I. List out with diffs all the bad stuff you think I'm doing. 2/ Open an RFC on me. That one is pretty much along the same lines of 1, but it just depends on how big of a deal you want to make this. 3/ You can recall me if you think I'm acting inappropriately as an admin. My process is here, it takes a couple weeks to complete the process (but it's quicker than ArbCom), and I will honor the outcome. So pick one, but stop disrupting discussions and processes. لenna vecia  18:49, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Why should I waste my time? Instead, it is good enough to point it out so that the closing admin can see what this AfD was really put forth as. Unlike you, I care only about the article. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:54, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * That's your jacked opinion, Ottava. I saw the creation list, noted that there were BLPs on it, I looked at them and determined that some of them did not appear to meet our notability requirements. You casting aspersions on my intentions is inappropriate. Stick to the content and the policies and stop making these stupid accusations. لenna  vecia  20:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I said "per Ottava Rima" in my keep vote, but that was only about his argument that notability also includes secondary criteria which are based on fame: a playboy centerfold is notable by virtue of simply having been a playmate. However, I think you were absolutely right in nominating this for deletion, because I too was surprised at how little real coverage there is. Vesal (talk) 20:37, 21 May 2009 (UTC)