User talk:GGfactchecker

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/VeriApp.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the reviewer's talk page

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 16:36, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/VeriApp concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/VeriApp, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 14:37, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your request for undeletion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that a response has been made at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion regarding a submission you made. The thread is Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/VeriApp. JohnCD (talk) 17:30, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/VeriApp concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/VeriApp, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:46, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AIV

Please stop it with the vandalism reports. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 01:19, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is a legitimate report. Thanks.GGFactchecker (talk) 01:21, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's not, and I will block you if you do it again. You can discuss matters on the talk page; I have locked the article, and I have done so with the BLP in mind. Drmies (talk) 01:22, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In so doing, you have betrayed Wikipedia's mission for free information. GGFactchecker (talk) 01:24, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Bullshit. The BLP takes precedence over "free", and over your mission. You think this content is important? Argue it. Don't pick fights with editors. A WP:NOTHERE block is real cheap. Drmies (talk) 01:25, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- BTW I've seen you spell your user name three different ways now. Just use the four tildes to sign, ~~~~. Drmies (talk) 01:27, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for your reminder. I have to admit I am new to the Wikipedia community, and it can be confusing. Your language is anything but a sign of civility. And stop this tech elitism. The most recent version of the section on Sexual Harassment you reverted was in fact the same as the version written by JoJo Anthrax. Editor Altenmaerenhave also weighted in on the issued of BLP, his edits were also vandalized by ElKevbo. The warnings are issued and the reports are filed with the belief that the time for talk is over with ElKevbo.I would appreciate you look CAREFULLY into the edit history and make a decision. Thanks!GGFactchecker (talk) 01:37, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - Your vandalism reports are in fact uncivil. You don't seem to understand that it is editors in my user category who look at those reports and judge them--which I did. The only place for you to make a case is the article talk page. Good luck. Drmies (talk) 01:40, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - It's fine that you have the privilege to judge them. But I have a right to protest, which I did. Calling me name is an utter disgrace. Shame on you. GGFactchecker (talk) 01:42, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      - So go read WP:VANDAL. You will see that there is no way you can call ElKevbo's edits vandalism. You report and get reverted, you report again. No one calls you any names, yet you complain someone is calling you names. No, you don't have a "right" to protest: this is a private website, not a free-speech zone, and you don't have a "right" to play the victim. "Shame on you"--thanks for the gaslighting, and congrats on having lost all credibility. Drmies (talk) 12:10, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]