User talk:Faits1789

Please slow down

Please stop blanking the AFD page. That's not how things work here. I'm not making any threats. I'm just letting you know that the edits you are making (things like removing AFD tags and blanking AFD pages) are not acceptable. They are against policy. --Onorem (talk) 22:04, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this message after I adjusted the page. 6:04 EDT will not modify that page again. I would like to reimpress on you that if you truly have good intentions, thats not how it comes across whatsoever. Our differences in how we grow a biography aside, your threats on article deletion and zealousness to not consider another editor's suggestion of source expansion was unfair. If you look at my edit history or even user oage, you will find that 95%+ of what I do here is assigning those labels to encourage growth, not discourage authors. Ive recently had editors send me the guidlines for page deletion and this did not meet that. Maybe you think if you threaten a user with less time, less edits with a block theyll just do what you say. I don't come here for that, I come to try to make the internet a slightly better place. Faits1789 (talk) 22:07, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Even the title of this is condecending. I don't need to slow down, you just want me to do what you say. You already know the outcome and you pretty much got your way. Will leave this thread up for a bit in case you'd like to respond, then I'm removing this from my talk page. Faits1789 (talk) 22:11, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to be helpful, not condescending. You were reverting things that you shouldn't have been. Your edits would have led to a block. Even your hasty move to draftify the article once it has been nominated is frowned upon, and I'm pretty sure the AFD tag should remain on it even in draft space, but I'm attempting to verify that. --Onorem (talk) 22:16, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move protected. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:46, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think the subject is notable, and the AfD, once started, needs to run till there is WP:CONSENSUS -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:47, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There were 17 citations and extensive *cited* background on him. Look at the gersion histories from yesterday, any woll suffice. Faits1789 (talk) 23:35, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Redacted)

September 2023

Hello, I'm Deepfriedokra. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jackson Maier that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Also, you have been told to stop moving pages around. That last one was disruptive and caused needless aggravation for me and @Liz:. TBH, I'm for blocking you right now for a lack of competence -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:42, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think kneecapping me is good for Wikipedia, but if thats what you want to do I literally cannot stop you. Faits1789 (talk) 23:37, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At this point the administrators have pretty much detered me from wanting to do any contributions to Wikipedia. Would you like me to just stop? If you say the word I'l give up on the submission and Wikipedia. I'm tired. Faits1789 (talk) 23:43, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What I want is for you to edit constructively within your level of understanding. Thanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:46, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really happy to do that, but as you can see you concur with me on notability and the page. I was the one who added 17 citations and formatted the Independent controversy, which someone just came and deleted. Same goes for personal life. I'll review the advice given, but again you agree with my creation call. Faits1789 (talk) 00:02, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why was I blocked from editing..? Faits1789 (talk) 00:53, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When will the deletion debate end? Faits1789 (talk) 00:46, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Redacted)

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

GeneralNotability (talk) 00:55, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Alexander Maier

Hello, Faits1789. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Alexander Maier, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:07, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]