User talk:Banaticus/archive2006

This is an archive page of my user talk page. If you wish to reopen an archived discussion or otherwise respond to me, please do so on my user talk page. Thanks! :)

Diana, Princess of Wales

Thank you for removing the vandalism, but note that User:Edchilvers did not vandalise, he only removed vandalism, study his edits carefully. Viewfinder 01:00, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. I'll go apologize to him. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. Banaticus 01:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, apology acccepted! I've done it myself (wrongly accused peeps of vandalism) loads of times--Edchilvers 23:01, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

your deletion requests

We do not feature books or theories based on their plausibility, but based on their notability: of course the phantom time hypothesis is almost as much bogus as epsilonism or scientology, but that doesn't mean we'll delete it because of that. The threshold of notability is rather low, see also Wikipedia:Pokémon test and m:Wiki is not paper. regards, dab (ᛏ) 08:19, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its notability is exceptionally low -- on the german wikipedia it might perhaps have wide notability, but none of his works have even been translated into English. I fail to see why we're even bothering to give such rubbish the time of day. Banaticus 08:23, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bot request

Your bot request at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BanaticusBot was malformed and did not match the instructions to add a request, so I've fixed it for you. Please review the changes so that you'll know how it should be later if you ask for another task for your bot. -- RM 11:57, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, RM -- I see that you're authorized to approve bots as per Wikipedia:Bots/Approvals_group. Do you have any further suggestions as to what else should be done to gain approval for this bot? Banaticus 19:07, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see several items added to your bot request. — xaosflux ^Talk 16:35, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Serious Waste Of Time

A tag has been placed on A Serious Waste Of Time, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because it is an article about a certain web site, blog, forum, or other community of web users that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles, as well as notability guidelines for websites. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on Talk:A Serious Waste Of Time. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Mhking 18:41, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied at User_talk:King_of_Hearts#A_Serious_Waste_of_Time. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:58, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I *did* apply the hangon tag to contest the deletion and you deleted it anyway. I applied the tag minutes after the speedy deletion tag had been placed and you came along scant hours later and deleted the page anyway. Please revert the deletion so that the speedy deletion can be properly contested. Banaticus 13:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Replied again... King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]