Talk:Interdictor (blog)

This article was nominated for deletion on 14 May 2007. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Blogging, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BloggingWikipedia:WikiProject BloggingTemplate:WikiProject BloggingBlogging articles

United States: Louisiana / New Orleans Mid‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Louisiana portal This article is supported by WikiProject Louisiana (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Louisiana portal This article is supported by WikiProject Louisiana - New Orleans (assessed as Mid-importance).

Untitled

"69.203.74.32" obviously has some kind of personal vendetta against Barnett and continuously vandalizes the article. I will continue to undo his/her modifications as needed.

Okay, it's official -- this article is of questionable notibility, but I won't nominate it for deletion. Until it cites its sources, however, I think the tag added should remain. 69.203.74.32 15:10, 24 February 2007 (UTC) anon[reply]

How very professional of you, 69.203.74.32; do you have an explanation for your vandalism? Ikilled007 16:58, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At first, I thought this was a silly, non-notable article with too much resemblance to a vanity article from a publicity seeker.

The previous edits were not mature. The current call for citation is justified. There are points of fact that should be verified from external sources. 69.203.74.32 18:13, 24 February 2007 (UTC)anon[reply]

So you surf Wikipedia looking for "silly, non-notable articles" to deface? Ikilled007 21:09, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's cute that you are so hepped up over your personal bragging page on WP. How about just locating the media sources to satisfy citation standards for an article? 69.203.74.32 22:26, 24 February 2007 (UTC)anon[reply]

I didn't create the article, and I made very few edits to it. Honestly, I couldn't care less if you nominate the article for deletion and it disappears. What I do not like is your childish behavior toward me and my fiancee -- your vandalism. I'd rather not have the article exist at all than have it become a tool for you to insult me. I could easily expand the article and add all sorts of cool facts -- verifiable in many media publications -- about how awesome I am, but instead, I've chosen simply to delete your nasty comments; so calling this my personal bragging page is absurd. Quite frankly, I don't want to do any work on this page at all. I don't want to link you to the Wired articles or MSNBC articles or CNN articles or any of the interviews. If you want to do it, feel free. Just stop vandalizing the page. Is that too much to ask? Ikilled007 00:46, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is not too much to ask.

Currently, however, the article is not being vandalized. It is being tagged as not meeting Wikipedia citation standards so that somebody, presumably someone who wrote or contributed to the original, will make it an encyclopedia article rather than an unreferenced advertisement for a blog. Without the links to those materials you say you don't want to link to, that is all that this is. I will periodically continue to make certain that the reference and citation tags stand. 69.203.74.32 14:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)anon[reply]

I agree completely. You are no longer vandalizing it and the current tags are proper - I certainly won't touch them. Let's hope the article finds someone who wants to do the leg work or gets deleted before the next prankster shows up. Ikilled007 03:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I think I have addressed most of the sourcing issues. DickClarkMises 16:42, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Interdictor (blog). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:53, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]