User talk:Deepsix66

And so on...

http://frozennorthproductionsexposed.wordpress.com/

What do you think of all that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.196.133.144 (talk) 03:17, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you continuing the charade, harassing, and the cyber-stalking?

Julian or whoever of Frozen North is maintaining this account - you have officially been outed by your own publicist, Lesley Sturla, who has spoken to Ms. Schooley and confirmed that you are behind these attacks.

Stop the harassment and focus instead on the blase reviews your game is getting and why it is still being delayed for release in the Canadian market. Bytemeh (talk) 03:09, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I have stated a thousand times, I am not affiliated with Frozen North Productions. I have no idea who Lesley Sturla is. I have read you making references to there being 'evidence' on other Wikipedia pages and have not actually seen this anywhere, because it does not exist. Please accept this fact and move on from my talk page. Deepsix66 (talk) 03:26, 2 November 2010 (UTC) Deepsix66[reply]

Ms. Schooley confirmed as much on her blog, along with a small selection of screencapped chat logs that out certain individuals from Frozen North as being discriminatory against her. I strongly suspect there will be more evidence to come - your own conflicting stories as to how, exactly, you stumbled upon her article on her and how you feel about Frozen North, for example are other good starting points for evidence. Bytemeh (talk) 03:40, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that Frozen North and Emily Schooley are in the middle of a feud (and that there are screencaps that confirm they do not like her) is not evidence that I am in any way affiliated with them. If they have admitted to harassing her on Wikipedia, that's because they did (the original debate for deletion saw Frozen North posting defamatory remarks under their company Wiki account). I've used the appropriate processes to nominate articles that do not satisfy the Wikipedia requirements for deletion. This is not cyber-bullying. If you disagree regarding the notability of these articles, I suggest you invest your time in looking for reliable sources to prove the articles' notability rather than continuing to make accusatory remarks on my talk page. Deepsix66 (talk) 03:50, 2 November 2010 (UTC)Deepsix66[reply]

That does not explain why your profile is linked in said blog entry, then, nor does it explain your contradicting yourself ("came across an argument she was having" vs "read an article in the Star") [1] [2], as to how, exactly, you came upon Ms. Schooley's website/Wiki. Or for that matter, why you chose to spend hours lobbying for her article deletion but not that of Frozen North/Flips Twisted World (whose article you later promoted significantly, by adding promotional references to it to a lot of other articles). Not to mention that your conduct is suspect at best that, as you said "While I do believe that the Frozen North Productions page isn't notable enough to be included here either, the same can be said for many other pages on Wikipedia and I'm not going to spend all my time nominating or participating in the AfD's for those pages either"[3], you are jumping all over the deletion of a low-importance article (purposely listed as a stub) that you would have had to specifically hunt down. Unless of course, you are cyber-stalking anything that has to do with Emily, in which case, your reasons for nominating that specific article and making very few contributions outside of promoting Flips and harassing Emily is reinforced further.Bytemeh (talk) 04:22, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

HEY! You guys seriously need to disengage. Making continued accusations against a user on his/her talk page is completely out of line, whether or not it is true. Please step away and focus your energies on improving Wikipedia articles. Ms. Schooley very well could have her own article by now if more attention was given to writing an article that was up to par, rather than focusing on all the drama surrounding the deletion of the old one. The Eskimo (talk) 16:12, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. Blatant lies and bullying piss me off. Am also concerned that my edits are all going to get trolled now, and I have a bit of a white knight complex. Bytemeh (talk) 04:42, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By "blatant lies", are you referring to your own actions? --Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 14:16, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Deepsix66, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Table of Contents

Department directory

Need help?

Questions — a guide on where to ask questions.
Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.
Wikipedia's 5 pillars — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations

Article Wizard — a Wizard to help you create articles
The Simplified Ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.
Guide to Wikipedia — A thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia.

How you can help:

Contributing to Wikipedia — a guide on how you can help.

Community Portal — Wikipedia's hub of activity.

Additional tips...

Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The or button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.

If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.

Deepsix66, good luck, and have fun. --Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 14:09, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WOW. Way to create an account JUST to pick on Emily Schooley. Jealous and insecure much? What did she ever do to you and why are you arguing so hard to try and discredit her? i don't see ANY other edits made by you other than about her. 206.248.165.158 (talk) 09:13, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is clearly an account made by the boys at Frozen North to try and discredit a wonderful actress.

As I indicated earlier, I have no affiliation with Frozen North and have never met anyone involved (including 'the boys at Frozen North') or Miss Schooley. I recommended Emily Schooley's article for deletion because it does not satisfy the criteria set forth by Wikipedia regarding reliable, unbiased sources and nothing she has done thus far is deemed notable by Wikipedia's standards (see the specific article debate page for my comments on the matter). I have said all I need to on the matter and it is up to Wikipedia's regular contributors to reach a consensus. In regards to Frozen North's message below ("Emily's going down!"), I find it immature and unprofessional and again stress that I am not affiliated with them in any way. I simply disagree with someone un-notable blatantly creating their own page and then dishonestly defending it while inviting their friends to mass-post in the article debate (see her twitter account). Deepsix66 (talk) 23:53, 15 October 2010 (UTC)Deepsix66[reply]

Don't undo edits. Also, don't be surprised if you find yourself with a lawsuit on your hands for misrepresentation, libel, and defamation of character. IPs can be subpoenaed. 68.171.231.21 (talk) 18:28, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me? I haven't un-done any edits, so I'm not sure what you're referring to. How is pointing out that the vast majority of the claims made in this article are un-cited considered 'misrepresentation, libel and defamation of character'? This is a user-moderated ENCYCLOPEDIA. Substantial sources must exist to back up the claims that are made here, so far these sources have not been provided.

You are not reporting anything from a neutral point of view, and thus should not be contributing to Wikipedia. And yes, you did edit this page by blanking out a previous comment. In short, grow up and get a life. If you keep up this harassment, you will be tracked and appropriate actions will be taken. Frozen North is retaliating against Ms Schooley because someone apparently hacked their Facebook, and they were falsely accusing her of doing so. They are starting nothing more than a pissing contest that they have no hope of winning. On the other hand, she has numerous things she could sue for, especially when it is proven they are connected to you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.171.231.16 (talk) 19:52, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You need to cut the crap and stop harassing Emily.Chaulis1 (talk) 22:53, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support dude. We appreciate it. Emily's going down! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frnnrthprd (talk • contribs) 23:05, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(@Frnnrthprd) This is not a very mature stance - maybe not the one I'd take when using an account so clearly associated with a company I'm trying to build a reputation for... Addionne (talk) 23:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All of this drama

Man, you sure opened a can of worms. Thank you for remaining calm in response to the comments here. I just wanted to let you know that I blocked 68.171.231.21 and 68.171.231.16 for their legal threats ("don't be surprised if you find yourself with a lawsuit on your hands for misrepresentation, libel, and defamation of character. IPs can be subpoenaed." and "If you keep up this harassment, you will be tracked and appropriate actions will be taken.") Please don't hesitate to report any more threats or personal attacks at the administrators' incident noticeboard or to me via my talk page or via email. — GorillaWarfare ^talk 00:18, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i am wondering: a) why you feel the need to attack my work, b) why you have made no other wikipedia edits other than to attack my work, and c) how you 'stumbled' upon my blog in the first place as you claimed. i am also going to ask you not to make any further edits or changes in regards to anything having to do with me, as i am under a libelous attack from Frozen North and if it appears you are connected to them, i would have to include you in any further action i feel is necessary. i did not create the page about myself, and find it somewhat concerning that you are making libelous comments about me. Nowhere on my Twitter did i ask anyone to come and comment on the page for deletion. Without prejudice, EmilySchooley (talk) 00:25, 16 October 2010 (UTC) (My Twitter is here, and i swear that i have not deleted any posts :http://twitter.com/the_emi) —Preceding unsigned comment added by EmilySchooley (talk • contribs) 00:29, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This type of post is not appropriate. Deepsix has expressly state that s/he has no affiliation with Frozen North Productions or yourself. Please assume good faith that s/he is being honest here. As for requesting him/her to not make any more edits in regards to you or Frozen North, this user has every right to edit as s/he sees fit. Although it may be wise to not edit until this debacle is over, the decision is up to the user. Now, as for "i would have to include you in any further action i feel is necessary.", you need to know that this is very inappropriate for Wikipedia. Please see WP:No legal threats for rationale on why legal threats are expressly forbidden. I have already blocked two IP users for making legal threats, and I will not hesitate to do the same with you. The only reason I decided not to do so here is because it was not an express threat, and I am assuming that that is not what you meant. However, I have strong doubts. Furthermore, I don't believe that anyone implied that you asked people to comment on the page for deletion. Please be much more careful with your posts in the future. — GorillaWarfare ^talk 01:02, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"I simply disagree with someone un-notable blatantly creating their own page and then dishonestly defending it while inviting their friends to mass-post in the article debate (see her twitter account)." -> is what i was replying to, specifically, as said by the OP at the top of the page. i didn't originally create my page and don't want to be causing more drama, but i am getting tired of these unsubstantiated attacks on my person. And, noted. EmilySchooley (talk) 01:21, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I looked up Frozen North Productions after reading an article in which they were mentioned in the Toronto Star last week and it lead me to your website. I can assure you I am not affiliated with them in any way. http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/games/article/873224--toronto-s-got-next-game I have not made "libelous" comments at any point. I inferred that you were asking friends to leap to your defense as a result of tweet in which you asked your followers to message you for a "quick favour". Almost immediately after that tweet your Wikipedia page was flooded with SPA users voting to "Keep" your page active- surely those people were directed here from somewhere as I'm sure some of the regular Wikipedia contributors can attest to the fact that these debates are not usually this lively. Obviously because it's not overt I don't expect it to be taken into consideration when the decision is made on the validity of your page, but it certainly makes it clear enough to me that you have a greater involvement here than you've lead on. Either way, I've made the reasons why I think your page is ill-fitting for an encylopedia very clear, and I'm sure those in charge have enough information to come to an appropriate decision. Deepsix66 (talk) 04:57, 16 October 2010 (UTC) Deepsix66[reply]

Thanks for showing your bias! 206.53.153.136 (talk) 19:57, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

interesting. What were the links that led you to my website? i don't see anything linking to me under Frozen North on the first five pages of Google, and didn't bother to go any further than that. However, you must have an awful lot of time on your hands to browse the internet, as you clearly spent a lot of time checking up on me and taking the time to create a wikipedia account just to attempt to defame me. =) Also, you are certainly making a lot of false assumptions about me and the content i post on my Twitter and elsewhere. As stated previously, i had nothing to do with the creation of my Wikipedia entry, which you falsely assumed. The same can be said for your allegations of my "sending" people to defend my page. And yes, the comments you have made about my supposed actions so far do match the Wikipedia definition of libel: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel - you are stating them as assumed truth, which they are not, and they are said to attempt to cast me in a negative light. However, yes, i am involved now, and those that know me will tell you that i never back down or lose a fight. As you have no affiliation with Frozen North then i guess the news that their pages are also up for deletion now won't be of any consequence to you. Fair is fair, after all, and those in charge will, as you said, be coming to an appropriate decision. =)

EmilySchooley (talk) 19:39, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe the Frozen North page should be on Wikipedia either for the same reasons (notability). Additionally, I question the professionalism of their company based on the post they made here (although to be fair that should have no bearing on whether they are notable enough to be included- which in my opinion they are not).

interesting, again. Funny to see that you have not contributed to either the Frozen North or the Flip's Twisted World pages with that opinion (unlike my page), though. EmilySchooley (talk) 08:56, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

talk

Hello, Deepsix66. You have new messages at Bigger digger's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Deepsix66

is a pansy with a teeny tiny c-0-ck who is overcompensating. Crash and burn. Frnnrthsx (talk) 05:45, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for stopping by, Emily. Deepsix66 (talk) 06:32, 26 October 2010 (UTC)Deepsix66[reply]

- You should read the policies on the following pages, and stop violating WP: AGF and WP: NPOV. Bytemeh (talk) 00:39, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Deepsix66. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Bytemeh (talk) 02:52, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Emily Schooley

There was no need for your edit to unblank Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emily Schooley, which you will note was reverted by another editor. It's time to drop this issue and move on. Plenty of editors have wasted enough time on this situation, and you should take this as a friendly warning to start concentrating on other things. Best wishes, Bigger digger (talk) 11:37, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]