User talk:Altimgamr

Speedy deletion nomination of Kids Media USA

Hello Altimgamr,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Kids Media USA for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Ish dar ian 07:21, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of FastestLaps

Hello Altimgamr,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged FastestLaps for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Ish dar ian 07:26, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of FastestLaps

Hello Altimgamr,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged FastestLaps for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Ish dar ian 07:41, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

January 2014

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as FastestLaps, to Wikipedia, as doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Wikipedia:Your first article; you might also consider using the Article Wizard. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Cindy(talk) 07:43, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why and how is the page "inappropriate?" Altimgamr (talk) 07:46, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Altimgamr. You should take a look at Wikipedia's notability policy. There are certain criteria that need to be met in order for a subject to have an article on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, both Fastestlaps and Kids Media fail to meet those criteria and are subject to the speedy deletion criteria. If you need help with creating an article, the links Cindamuse provides above are extremely helpful resources. Ish dar ian 07:50, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of FastestLaps

Hello Altimgamr,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged FastestLaps for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Ish dar ian 07:47, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, as you did at FastestLaps, you may be blocked from editing. If you need guidance on how to create appropriate pages, try using the Article Wizard. Cindy(talk) 07:51, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, well, just to let you know, I'm the co-founder of Kids Media USA (http://kidsmediausa.com/). My classmate (Krisjanis) created FastestLaps (the website, not the Wikipedia article). Altimgamr (talk) 07:59, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: As noted to you in previous messages, all articles on websites must meet the notability guidelines to remain on Wikipedia. With you being the co-founder of the website, you have a conflict of interest and it strongly recommended that you not write about your own website. Please see Wikipedia's Business' FAQ before you continue to edit. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 08:09, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Altimgamr, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Altimgamr! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Benzband (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:40, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Saleen S281 Sedan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Saleen S281 Sedan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saleen S281 Sedan until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. SteveCof00 (talk) 10:25, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Altimgamr, I am sorry if I seem contrarian - but I simply don't trust any of the sources you have listed for the supposed Saleen S281 Sedan. Do you have a scan of a period magazine article, a brochure, anything? The only things I can find when searching the web is stuff seemingly written by yourself. The youtube link only calls it a "Saleen P71", thus proving nothing at all. Best, Mr.choppers | ✎ 05:02, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It has an S281 package. It has a supercharged 4.6-liter Modular V8 engine. Also, it is my brother's video. Altimgamr (talk) 14:33, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I checked that it was the seventh Saleen S281 Sedan-packaged Crown Victoria ever made, so it's a #7. Altimgamr (talk) 16:41, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Still not a reputable source - also, it doesn't say that anywhere within it. Unless you can come up with an actual source, I will persist in believing that you're trying to create a hoax. Mr.choppers | ✎ 00:18, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

February 2014

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, you may be blocked from editing. NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:38, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was asking if swellserver.com is a good source. Altimgamr (talk) 04:39, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't act like a troll. "CELEBRITY FAKE NEWS HOAX GENERATOR" is plastered all over the site. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:41, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not acting like one. I don't look like one. Take a look at this:
http:// justin.bieber .swellserver .com/news/top_stories/auto80_m.php Altimgamr (talk) 04:45, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NeilN, looking past this section on Altimgamr's talk page, and looking at this, this, this and this, I think Altimgamr is simply a very inexperienced Wikipedia editor. This message that Altimgamr left on your talk page also makes me think that. Flyer22 (talk) 04:47, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Looking at his talk page and the AFD, it seems he is here only to troll and create hoax articles. Altimgamr, consider this your last warning. If further trolling occurs, I will ask for you to be blocked from editing. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:50, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, my bad, and sorry, I will not allow myself to use swellserver.com or any other hoax generator as a reliable source anymore. Altimgamr (talk) 04:52, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, NeilN, I was about to state: "Then again, going by the 'I'm not acting like one. I don't look like one. Take a look at this:' comment above, there's a good chance I'm wrong on that." Flyer22 (talk) 04:54, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And only a dumb, clown-headed victim like me would come up with something as stupid as a celebrity fake generator hoax to use as a reliable source. Altimgamr (talk) 05:00, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at List of Nürburgring Nordschleife lap times, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Cindy(talk) 06:13, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for persistent posts of unreferenced, poorly or incorrectly referenced information, edit warring, and incivility. 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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Altimgamr (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Okay, I'm sorry. I will NEVER use a Weebly page as a reliable source again, even if it has a logo of a reliable source. I will pretend like such unreliable sources, including personal, unofficial YouTube videos, as copyright violations and never use them as reliable sources. Only a stupid, dummy clown-head victim like me would illegally impersonate Freddie Benson and write a stupid Weebly page claiming that it's "powered by reliable source Motor Trend". I will not do that anymore, though. Altimgamr the Corvette Video Clown 07:11, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Aside from the above being a very unconvincing unblock request, your behavior since the block (block-evading using an IP address and blatantly hopping IPs to 'argue with yourself') indicates you are blatantly not here to improve the encyclopedia, but, speaking frankly, to troll. Accordingly, your block has been extended to indefinite; if you're willing to productively contribute to Wikipedia in the future, I'd suggest taking up the standard offer. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:48, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Altimgamr (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Bushranger, you should check again, as I'm no friend of the two sockpuppet IPs. Altimgamr the Corvette Video Clown 04:26, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

As he said and you failed to read, or desperately hoped that whoever reviewed what may well be your last unblock request (whether you intend it to be or not) would not read, it's not whether the socks agree with you, it's whether we think you control them. And if it looks like you're using the IPs to harass this account in a laughable, childish ploy to cloak yourself in sympathy, then that's what it looks like. — Daniel Case (talk) 05:13, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Areaseven

You should check again, as I'm no friend of Jasons99Contour. Altimgamr the Corvette Video Clown 04:31, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mr.choppers

You should check again, as I'm no friend of 0slavsan0. Altimgamr the Corvette Video Clown 04:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Bushranger or Daniel

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Altimgamr (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I didn't evade a single block, as I wasn't online for hours. The blatant IPs you've mentioned obviously did steal my account. You should block them as open proxies or something; I don't know. Altimgamr the Corvette Video Clown 05:51, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

We're not buying it, and your talk page access is being revoked. only (talk) 10:28, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.