Talk:John Lane

Page blanked

I have removed what purported to be a biography of a pedophile. This was an article placed in talk-space. If you think there should be an article, please create it as an article, with a link on the article page. I understand why the article was created, but it does not belong here. Furthermore, I would question whether the culprit was of general notability or notoriety. Peterkingiron (talk) 22:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The edit was pure vandalism. In fact it was so bad that I had to have it oversighted. (Perminatly removed as well as it's log entry) Mww113 (talk) 22:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers to User:Alison who oversighted the edit. Mww113 (talk) 22:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope 'vandalism' refers to what I removed, not what I did. I did not in fact regard it as "pure vandalism", merely as an attmept to provide an article on a NN pedophile - very notable to the victim and his family, but not generally. If it had been an aricle I would have supported deletion on an AFD. However I had no wish to convert it to an article, and then nominate it for deletion, leaving it to the creator to rescue it if he thought fit. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am the writer, as such, before you snarky elitists go about delting my poting, don't I deserve the right to at least be heard on this posting before the article, which was so summarilly executed, at least had the opportunity to defend it's merits and/or validity. And in the for what it is worth department, what ever happened to "ethics".

If I was wrong in the location to which I have posted info on this human waste of life, please tell me where and the hell can I post on this site!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnsworstnightmare (talk • contribs) 04:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a message board. If you had wanted, you could have written an article on the culprit, which you would link to the article page here, but as a disambigation page, something of the length that you, would not belong there. Furthermore, the request to contact you would be non-encylopaedic and could not remain. Nevertheless, however badly the culprit treated your son, it is most unlikely that an article on him would pass the threshold of being notable (see [{WP:N]]). The result would thus be that any article would probably be deleted. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peter, as God of all Talk Space here to within, please, with specificity, tell us all how to "write an article on this server (Wikipdedia) and then to have it linked to", as well. For if I had know this, I might not have encurred your wrath. So, please, do tell!

And, dear Peter, just for the heck of it, When did you get to determine that a PEDOPHILE ( JOHN FORREST LANE ) was not "of general notability or notoriety". Since when was a PEDOPHILE not "of general notability or notoriety" to either you, your kids or Society in general. Really Peter, exactly on what date and time did this happen???

Signed HARRY W. MURPHY

PS At least I have the stones to sign my given name. as I so humbly sit at your altar, I pose the question to you, do you have the stones to actually sign your given name instead of hiding behind your all-knowing, all-seeing Wizardesque facade???