User talk:Ian.thomson/Archive 25

New stuff goes at the bottom, people. Also, please sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~)

Quran proves Jesus was not crucified

Hey there, thank you for your help in moving this along. As we both agree that the Quran is the word of God I understand you want to help get rid of some of the racist bias on wikipedia. Thanks for your help!! Teetotaler 19 May, 2015 — Preceding undated comment added 11:03, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1) We are in disagreement over the Quran. I'm a Christian.

2) Your comments here and here were racist. Discussing the historical assessment of everyone on the planet who is not a Muslim is not racist, it's providing due weight. So, yes, I do want to get rid of racist bias on Wikipedia, which is why I'm not helping you.

Ian.thomson (talk) 15:51, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Holy Quran IS the word of God. Maybe you have no Quran? It is a beautiful book, especially when it teaches that an ordinary fellow named Jesus was NOT crucified. Thank God!!!! And thank God Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world!!! -Teetotaler 19 May, 2015 — Preceding undated comment added 16:46, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not proselytize on Wikipedia. It is considered inappropriate, in addition to being a very poor replacement for argument.--Mr Fink (talk) 20:01, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh don't worry, he's already blocked. And for the record, I have a paperback copy of the Quran and a few digital copies, and read about a third to half of it in high school. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:06, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chitral

hi, Thanks for your contribution chitral district. Please not revert with page. The previous page of chitral full consist of vandalism about many topic which are not true. I make these correct... And you undo? Why??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saqraat (talk • contribs) 04:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You replaced sourced information with unsourced information, and clearly got the wrong official website. Plus, you're a sockpuppet of a blocked editor. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:39, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

chitral district

please!!! You can not change solid history by editing! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saqraat (talk • contribs) 04:46, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what I'm doing. I'm reverting your vandalism. Chitral's website is Chitral.gov.pk. That is plainly obvious, and any attempts to change it to something else are obviously vandalism. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:49, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

sockpuppet

who is sockpuppet can you explain? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saqraat (talk • contribs) 04:47, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I explained on the sockpuppet investigation page that I already gave you a link for. You are behaving exactly like another editor that we blocked for vandalizing articles -- so there's no reason for us to believe that you are not that person using a different name. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:51, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet

hi, This is my one and only account I have no another account Who are you?where are you from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saqraat (talk • contribs) 04:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You mean that that account is the only one you have right now. This edit you made is an indication that you are just a new account for the same user we blocked before. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:57, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chitral District

hi, why you made changes about chitral do you live in chitral? I am from chitral and i better know about chitral & keep remember in you mind "Chitral is a district not a state. It is just a district of khyberpukhtunkhwa" People laught at this when they were seen State word on top!!! Website Chitral.gov.pk is secondary website official is Khyberpukhtunkhwa.gov.pk Climate I lived in chitral. Never climate reached at 44'C Chitral is high elevation area weather is cold in this region in winters weather becomes -minus temperature Please, i request you not undo my changes— Preceding unsigned comment added by Saqraat (talk • contribs)

It does not matter where users live, what matters are sources. Your edits removed a source as well as sourced information. Your other edits were also just like those of a vandal we previously blocked. Ian.thomson (talk) 05:14, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#Should headings maintain neutrality?. Sundayclose (talk) 16:44, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Saw, I keep that page on my watchlist. I think we saved our responses around the same time. Ian.thomson (talk) 16:45, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Out of town

I am currently out of town for my uncle's surgery, and will not always have a reliable net connection. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:25, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Back in town

...For at any rate. There's a family reunion next week but that family's wifi is a bit more reliable than the hotel's and hospital's were. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:26, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Religion in infoboxes of nations

There is an RfC that you may be interested in at Template talk:Infobox country#RfC: Religion in infoboxes of nations. Please join us and help us to determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 14:02, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quick message

I'm sure it's me, and I apologise, but which diffs do you require? Cassianto ^Talk 23:46, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's not simply for me, it's to make sure that any claim of behavior can be readily proven so a previously uninvolved observer can come to an impartial judgement. Every claim of any action or behavior needs a diff to back it up if things are going to go anywhere, either to firmly settle that the repeated reports about your civility have merit or are just common hounding.

You said "Again, I was called a "cunt" directly, but I opined that Bugs's behaviour was twatish." Ian.thomson (talk) 23:52, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The incident whereby I was called a "cunt" is inadmissible because that was dealt with by way of a block. I opined that another user's behaviour was twatish as he was trying to instigate me into an argument which had long died. That diff is available at the report. Cassianto ^Talk 23:55, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, the current report is a result of a logged out user - possibly Caden - who has posted on my talk with the sole intention to create this whole drama. I told the IP to fuck off, as I am entitled to do, so this report has no legs from the start. Cassianto ^Talk 23:57, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, well, you know, that's just like your opinion, man. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:00, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your link to a copyvio video confuses me further. I think it best we stop talking as you are clearly only here to provoke. Cassianto ^Talk 00:03, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See Fair use. Nice try, though. I'm actually looking to settle this with a proper record of behavior. If you haven't been misbehaving, then there's nothing for you to lose. If Bugs or anyone else has been provoking you, then you've got plenty to gain. Just letting the threads close with no resolution only opens the door to continued accusations. As for your accusation that I'm here to provoke, how does that reconcile with your attitude that "If someone, in my opinion, is being like a twat, I will tell them. There is no harm in that." Multiple users have explained to you (in just the latest thread alone) that that's provocative and generally regarding as insulting. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:10, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your view of it being "provocative and generally ... insulting" is a subjective one. Others would find it to be a reality check. I can't prove anything, I have mere suspicions which is certainly not enough to waste people's time at ANI. I'm one of those users who like to create and expand articles at Wikipedia, not waste my time on this bollocks. Cassianto ^Talk 00:17, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a reality check for you: If you want to continue being a part of this community, you have to at least be aware of other editor's subjective views. You have to be aware that saying someone is behaving like a twat is itself behaving like a twat. You have to be aware that the only way to be sure that people don't keep bothering you about this sort of stuff is to not address them in ways they might find insulting. While drafting any message, contemplate on any little bit that someone could use to argue against you. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:21, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I'm aware of that. My point to you is that not everybody thinks alike. One person's "don't behave like a twat" is another person's "don't behave badly". Bugs knew what I meant, and that's why he didn't file a report. He left it, as I expected he would have done. This whole thread has come about because I told a troll to fuck off. If it weren't for people like me, this whole encyclopaedia wouldn't exist, so it wouldn't be possible for prissy people to feel insulted during interactions. Cassianto ^Talk 00:28, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I'm getting at: you need to understand that saying "don't behave like a twat" will be read as an insult, and people will read instructions to "fuck off" as a violation of WP:CIVIL. It doesn't matter what you intend, that's what's going to happen. If you understand that, it's your fault when people get insulted. And elitism doesn't help anyone. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:37, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well it certainly helps this site. It's becoming more frequent where I question myself as to why I bother! People need to stop being so prissy and precious and wake up to the world without their rose-tinted spectacles on. Cassianto ^Talk 00:52, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Articles will be written with or without you. Articles will be improved with or without you. The site will receive funding with or without you. Yes, you've helped, but that doesn't make you irreplaceable, and that doesn't excuse being insensitive. You need to take off your Cassianto-mirroring spectacles and realize that you are not the site. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:56, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say I was "the site", and frankly, that is a foolish thing to say. Likewise, neither did I suggest that articles would not be written without me. My point was that without content creators like me, this place wouldn't exist. Thus, civility wouldn't be an issue. Cassianto ^Talk 09:04, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are plenty of other content creators who don't have civility problems, who at least understand that civility is a means of understand that civility is basic grown up behavior. Content creation does not excuse other behavior, just like civility does not excuse POV-pushing, or neutrality excuses edit warring, or any good behavior excuses another behavior that disrupts the site. Ian.thomson (talk) 15:07, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Another subjective view when you infer that I have a civility problem. I don't. I'm afraid my civility goes out of the window when a filthy troll-like IP rocks up on my talk page just to cause trouble. I'm pleased I told them to fuck off and I'd do so again in a heart beat if they were only there to cause trouble. Cassianto ^Talk 15:25, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is those subjective views of others that determine whether or not you have a civility problem. Notice that two admins said that they would have blocked you had they seen the comment when it first came up. Consider that how often you've been blocked, including having talk page access and even email access revoked. You have a problem and it's not going to get better if you blame everyone else for it and cite your creations like an Ayn Rand parody. Ian.thomson (talk) 15:34, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Klevan

Hello Ian, I'll be very thankful for your help in improving my article about Alexander Klevan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yuliagrig (talk • contribs) 06:44, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(Responded on user's talk page). Ian.thomson (talk) 15:22, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The user TylerHartmanTheOneAndOnly!

I started a SPI under that name as I didn't realize there was a earlier account!Wgolf (talk) 01:11, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's something you had to be there for if you can't see the previous versions. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:16, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I saw that page earlier today-but since I couldn't find it...Wgolf (talk) 01:17, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wut Hmone Shwe Yee

It cannot edit Wut Hmone Shwe Yee. Because Wut Hmone Shwpe Yee is a wrong name. So, please let me to create a new article with right name Wutt Hmone Shwe Yi. And I request you to delete this wrong article Wut Hmone Shwe Yee. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Myatthinzaraung (talk • contribs) 17:18, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Then go to Talk:Wut Hmone Shwe Yee and request that the page be moved. Two articles about the same person is useless. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:19, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright related question

I ran into a problem, in which you are likely to have some input, Can you look at: User_talk:Moonriddengirl#Empty_duplication_detector_reports--S Philbrick (Talk) 22:35, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No copyright violation

Thank you for intervening and deleting the article on the Tholos tombs of Pylia; I need to inform you that the article in Wikipedia is almost the same as the one on the internet site of Pylia because they are both implemented under the project "Digital Enhancement of Pylia", implemented by Timeheritage, Diadrasis and Dotsoft on behalf of the Archaeological ephorate of Messenia. I am the author of both texts and due to the problem it arose I just requested the Ephorate to provide me with a specific letter to address to wikipedia, as the same problem will appear with other articles as well. Would you be so kind and revert the article to its previous situation, as we need to submit all the material to the managing authority and otherwise it will appear as if we have not done the work? --Timeheritage (talk) 11:56, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(Responded on user's talk page). Ian.thomson (talk) 12:02, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Archaeological Ephorate of Messenia is the official managing authority of all antiquities in the region of Messenia (part of which is Pylia); so this is not exactly a group; it is us, the members of timeheritage that function as collaborators (given the fact that the permanent personnel does not work on digitization and enhancement through the internet). so the answer is that, yes, I write the texts on behalf of the authority. --Timeheritage (talk) 12:11, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a shared account, I'm the only administrator. Timeheritage does not promote anything for profit or any other kind of bias. Everything is sheer academic work for the dissemination of knowledge and for the enhancement of Greek history and archaeology. --Timeheritage (talk) 12:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Things

I have edit the Real House Wives of Atlanta but I never taken no references off the only thing I took off was that Claudia wasn't departing and stuff and it hasn't been officially of her rumors so I was doing the best of my ability and I feel like its not good enough l. So I was doing it wit her to be nice. So the changes I did was for a reason it hasnt been officially announced and confirmed and every thing else what to do now. So idk now.

Thanks & God Bless You Valleryking (talk) 18:13, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I said you removed sourced information, I did not say you removed sources. If you do not understand the difference, you might have an easier time editing a different language Wikipedia. In this edit, you removed information that was reliably sourced. The source is not a rumor -- E! network and Bravo network are owned by the same company. If one network says something about the other, it may as well have been officially announced. The source does not say that the information is a rumor, either. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:18, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Its not officially confirmed that's I'm tryna say I understand where u coming from but I think doubting mev in stet of doing everything and that is rumors and I never said becuz everything so understand where I'm coming because it seems like u not n idk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valleryking (talk • contribs) 18:31, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

E! network is owned by NBC. Bravo is owned by NBC. If Bravo announces that something happened, they are speaking on NBC's behalf. If E! says something happened, then NBC is also saying that something happened. In either case, it's NBC making both the decisions and the announcements.

It would be easier to understand you if your English was clearer.Ian.thomson (talk) 18:40, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ian then why its not conformed or or officially announced. MARK MY WORDS.

That's rumors n other stuff u don't understand me but I understand so what else u want me to say nothing because BRAVO didn't really did it so what else there is to say becuz idk n u not understanding but she on season 8 so sources never actually said she was departing but it wasn't her choice so idk n nots officially conformed but prolly to u but iits idk n I'm done fussing wit u on the INTERNET so IDK n its childish. And I'm tired of explaing my self to u becuz u not understanding so every thing is out of the way.

And I wish I the best for u of luck of anything and God will bless ur life and that's it.

Thanks for every thing and I really appreciate everything.

Thank You and Your Welcome, Valleryking— Preceding unsigned comment added by Valleryking (talk • contribs)

See Transitive property. If Bravo is owned by NBC, and E! is owned by NBC, Bravo and E! are just different faces of the same network -- NBC. You clearly do not understand that, otherwise you would not be trying to distinguish the two. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:05, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

God bless ur life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valleryking (talk • contribs) 19:10, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

god have

God blessed ur life and have Ian. Amen Please stop ok Valleryking (talk) 19:15, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

come on now

Can u please stop reverting n making changes on Total Divas page l. U know I can report u on this so I advice n giving u a warning to stop OK.

(Valleryking) Valleryking (talk) 01:58, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You've regularly refused to provide sources that directly support your claims, edit warred despite repeated warnings, and made unsourced claims to biographies of living persons. Your previous attempts to file reports were laughably mistaken both in their intention and application. Multiple editors have tried to help you do things right, and yet you regularly brushed them off with saccharine pseudo-civility. You've complained that people are being childish and don't understand you, when you're the one txtspklol instead of real English.

Administrative action would only bring relief to me and everyone who has to clean up after you. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:20, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But who has tried to clean up for me? But I understand u n every one else but u not understanding me so what I'm sopost to do. I'm looking like the bad guy here but I'm not the bad guy. "I never said people were acting childish I said the situation is". I'm speaking English here so u could understand me much better. I'm just stating the facts about Summer Rae returning for season 4 and the truth and you not. I'm only do the right thing and u are too. I thought we were doing it together but it seems like we not do idk anymore. (Valleryking) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valleryking (talk • contribs) 03:00, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you understood what I've told you, you would understand that Wikipedia doesn't care about what editors claim to have seen -- only what sources say. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:09, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I know what Wikipedia says but u so childish that's why u don't understand me. I know what the sources says and that's why I put it for Summer Rae return.

Warning: Stop reverting my edits and my changes please.

(Valleryking) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valleryking (talk • contribs) 03:21, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm being so nice to you right now and you just don't know. Valleryking (talk) 03:29, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Think about it: Wikipedia has been around for a while, but is the encyclopedia "anyone can edit." Now, in order to keep the site from becoming a free-for-all of conspiracy theorists vs skeptics, atheists vs Muslims, Bronies vs Jabronies, Star Wars vs Star Trek, whatever -- we've had to put consistent policies and guidelines into place to decide what gets into articles and what does not, such as citing sources and not adding original research.

If someone repeatedly ignores the advice experienced editors give about those policies and guidelines, who's behaving childishly? Who's being nice?

What position are you in to warn anyone? And if you're so convinced that you're right and that's all that matters, why are you backing down? Ian.thomson (talk) 03:33, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My position that I am in is telling truth like I been of doing. Why are you backing down ? If u wasn't backing down u wouldn't ask that because u are. I know I'm right n that's all because u don't believe me so idk n plz stop it on here. I'm not ignoring u it is just u don't understand At All. Stop the madness.God blessed you. (Vallery King) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valleryking (talk • contribs) 03:48, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

comment The problem with your claim of "telling truth" is that you don't bother to explain how or why anyone should believe your alleged truthfulness beyond you saying so. If you are telling the truth, then wouldn't it be little or no problem to provide another source to show that you're telling the truth, right?--Mr Fink (talk) 04:20, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you are right but I need some one to understand me and no one is not n so please help me Apokryltaros and give me advice but Summer is returning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valleryking (talk • contribs) 04:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have "understand" and "believe" confused. We understand that you claim you saw something on TV. We need you provide proof of it, and you keep refusing to. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:52, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I did you proff but that's not good enough and I'm not talking about what i said I'm talking about the link I put up here and u still haven't understand yet. I'm not refusing to nothing do don't believe me like u said u don't but I know I'm right. That's the bottom line + Point blank period and that's what I said. Ever since I joined this site its the Sam stuff with this S.R. return and u keep on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valleryking (talk • contribs) 05:08, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And we have said your link you have provided doesn't relate at all to your information. We have told you that plenty of times! The article goes on to talk about what Summer has been up to after returning to the WWE due to her filming The Marine 4 (or something like that). The article never states that she is returning to Total Divas for season 4. The article was also published in 2014 before the second half of season 3 began (with Paige and Alicia), and season 4 of Total Divas wasn't even confirmed at that point. Your link and your statements are not substantial. Myself, and many other users have explained to you your wrong doings yet you can't seem to understand what is the problem here. MSMRHurricane (talk) 05:18, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Y'ALL DON'T UNDERSTAND.

Point blank period and that's what isaid idk what's the prob here but yall not understanding Mr or nothing but Summer is returning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valleryking (talk • contribs) 05:25, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We understand perfectly that you're not using this talk page to request an unblock, and are rehashing the exact same arguments and textspeak that got you the block. Either you provide a published source that says what you're claiming or stop talking. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 19:39, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sikkhi

Hi i noticed you changed the name of the religion of Sikhs beloning to Sikkhi to Sikhism. This because the religion is known to english speakers that way. Isn't that a strange way to aproach? You can call water, pani or agua, its still the same thing. But yes we Sikhs te followers of this faith call it sikhi, and it is different to sikhism which is a construction. I don't see how we should change every religion by putting an Ism behind it wil make English people understand it even better. Isn't this we have wikipedia for? Desibhagera (talk) 11:05, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Saying "You can call water, pani or agua, its still the same thing" actually justifies calling the religion whatever it is called in the local language, which on this site is English. The article already notes that the religion is called Sikkhi in Punjabi.

Notice that the Confucianism article isn't titled Kǒngjiào, Christianity isn't titled Natsrút, and Hinduism isn't titled Sanatana Dharma.

It's not changing the religions, but telling English speakers about water instead of pani or aqua. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:51, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I have an original 1913 edition of Man: Whence, How and Whither

Who to I contact to authenticate what I have? RoseandGerald (talk) 03:18, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would check with a library or maybe a non-chain bookstore. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:21, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

indeffed user

You responded to a question on making friends with trans people, which I have removed. This is a courtesy to explain. The User, Special:Contributions/174.7.167.7, who geolocates to Vancouver, Canada, has all the same interests and habits of Venustar84 including creating odd categories of people (which she was banned from doing) discussing LGBT issues, and discussing Japanese cartoons. μηδείς (talk) 17:56, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ok. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:04, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help With Sandbox

Hi Ian- I am BBazos (AKA Barbara)-- you have sent me a few messages on my talk page and you mentioned that I could reach out to you with any questions.
So you know I have tried to create a page for Minhas Craft Brewery and there was a speedy deletion. Since then I have been learning all about Wiki best pratices and been working on that page (off line) so that I can try again. In the meantime I worked on a page for one of the owners, Manjit Minhas. I wrote up the whole page and laid it out in my Sandbox-- I just did this today (7/14/15). What should I do next? Should I try to create a page for Manjit? If I should be contacting someone else with these questions, please accept my apology and if you could, please point me in the right direction.
Thank you very much, Barbara Bbazos (talk) 21:07, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stick to secondary or tertiary professionally published mainstream academic or journalistic sources. Linkdin is generally not regarded as an appropriate source. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:07, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK- thank you. I updated my source. I am going to take a shot at creating a page. Thank you again very much!Bbazos (talk) 14:59, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One More Possible Account For the Sockpuppet

Have you checked out Wangwengwong (talk · contribs)? It's another account that's mucked around in Machairodus and other prehistoric animal pages screwing around with era information like HanselJolteon (talk · contribs) and his sockpuppets.--Mr Fink (talk) 04:15, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Apokryltaros: I considered him, but couldn't find anything solid (yet). Ian.thomson (talk) 04:16, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I'll keep an eye on that one, too.--Mr Fink (talk) 04:17, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

HanselJolteon:I am giving the right information I use other account because I know most of you lost trust on me and that's why i use other account the Wikipedia administrator may block me from creating account and block every sock puppet except HanselJolteon— Preceding unsigned comment added by HanselJolteon (talk • contribs)

reply, rewrite for ../wiki/Uzair

Thanks Ian for your feedback on my edits/additions in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzair. Will re-edit and repost as suggested with the appropriate citations. Thanks again.

Anwar Sadath Sakkeerathu (talk) 11:15, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

what you guys doing

ammy virk is well known singer and the theiamhoney blocked just for the name mach with well known singer honey singh and you guys going delete the page of ammy virk who have verify id on facebook and also in new paper just tell me why you guys are wanna show of that is we're indian that's why you guys like to diatribe us in anything you guys can woowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hakam_singh_indian (talk • contribs)

See WP:General notability guideline, WP:Identifying reliable sources, and WP:NOTPROMO. It does not matter where anyone is from, Wikipedia is not the place to users to promote their own careers, or the careers of those they work with. We rely on independent reliable sources. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:59, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

i know yo yo honey singh personally i know diljit dosanjh personally i know gippy grewal parsley delete all of them article right now how much i know about wikipedia is the place of known things about not about what you like or not and is not a Copyright of any website

We do not care who you know -- We depend only on reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Those blue words are links to site guidelines and policies that confirm what I am telling you. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:41, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]