User talk:Majorchaos

A tag has been placed on Mr 18 inches, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (below the existing db tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Deranged bulbasaur 12:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Mr 18 inches

Welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome your help to create new content, but your recent additions (such as Mr 18 inches) are considered nonsense. Please refrain from creating nonsense articles. If you want to test things out, edit the sandbox instead. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Deranged bulbasaur 14:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Please do not remove speedy tags

Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles, as you did with Mr 18 inches. If you do not believe the article deserves to be deleted, then please do the following:

1. Place {{hangon}} on the page. Please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag(s).
2. Make your case on the article's talk page.

Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. --Onorem 15:04, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Do not remove speedy tags

Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from articles that you have created yourself. If you do not believe the article deserves to be deleted, then please do the following:

1. Place {{hangon}} on the page. Please do not remove any existing speedy deletion notice(s)
2. Make your case on the article's talk page.

Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. --Onorem 15:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Mr 18 inches, you will be blocked from editing. The Kinslayer 15:15, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

STOP removing the tags

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Onorem 15:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Stop, slow down, don't get blocked, let me help

If you're not blocked yet, stop removing the tags. Talk to me and let me help. --Dweller 15:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, Hi. Are you ready to talk? We can chat here. --Dweller 15:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I've removed this user from AIV for now. Will check back soon. Bubba hotep 15:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

ok but they are vandalising my entry for no reason. it is a stub

Hello. First up, I think you're not a vandal. I've got you pinned as a genuine, good faith editor, frustrated by Wikipedia's rules etc. Please don't let me down, as I've specifically requested for you not to be blocked.

Let's take these things one at a time. First of all, it seems that you once created an article on this topic and it was deleted when you weren't around to look after it. That happens. You can see the history of it here. You can contact the deleting admin and request it to be restored.

If I could just interject, he didn't create the original article as his account was created today and the article was originally created some point in the past and deleted 'a month or 2 ago'. Just wanted to make sure that was clear. The Kinslayer 15:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll say more about stubs and porn on Wikipedia in a minute. --Dweller 15:38, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

thanks... the original article from a month or 2 ago had several pargraphs of info. someone deleted it. but it was the same as other porn bio's. someone is jeolous of large dicks i suspect and marked it for deletion. mr 18 inch is a legitimate porn star and famous for having the biggest tool :) so he deserves a wiki spot.

i did create the original from a month or 2 ago as the user iamtheone but i have forgotten my password :( and noticed some vandal had deleted my mr 18 inch article which i put a lot of work into. so i created this account today.

Please stop referring to people as vandals. --Onorem 16:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

The deletor was an Administrator, and if you want to run around calling one of them a vandal, you better be damn sure you know what your talking about and have hard proof to back it up. I'm surprised some who's already been here in the past doesn't already know all this though. Very strange. The Kinslayer 16:03, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Several paragraphs would be a stub. One sentence isn't. I suggest you contact NawlinWiki and politely request the article be recreated, to go to WP:AFD if necessary. Leave the existing article alone - it's worthless. --Dweller 16:01, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Despite your advice, he's went and recreated the article yet again, complete with speedy and hangon tags still intact. The Kinslayer 16:16, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

The original article was Mr 18 inch, deleted 26 Feb. Bubba hotep 16:03, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Bubba. That was also deleted by NawlinWiki. You need to decide if his name is 18 "inch" or "inches" before anything else. --Dweller 16:07, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

It looks like Answers.com still had a copy of the page in one of it's forms anyway. Could be useful for recreating the article. It does lack reliable sources. That would have to be fixed, and it would need to meet WP:PORNBIO, which it might already...I haven't checked myself. --Onorem 17:07, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

no i had one created like 6 months or more ago under the username "iamtheone" it was several paragraphs long. are you able to find out what email address i used to create that account so i can retrieve my password?

my original mr 18 inch article was created several months ago under the username of "iamtheone" it was deleted for no reason as it was like all other porn actor bio's... the only reason this bio is so short is because someone keeps deleting it. are you able to retrieve the original mr 18 inch article from a months ago?

What was the article name for the original article? It should show up on the deletion log.

Anyway, you can recreate the article from scratch. Two ways of doing this. Either start in your user space (I can show you how) or write a proper stub. Several sentences, that include a real assertion of notability, per our pornstar guideline WP:PORN. --Dweller 16:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

The original article was created in December, 2005. And I can confirm it was created by the username that you used to go by. Although I am able to undelete it, I am not comfortable doing so because it was another admin's decision to do so. It seems that at some point it was vandalised quite severely, over a large period of time, in fact. Given this, I would not know what version to restore anyway. Your best course of action would be to contact NawlinWiki, as Dweller suggests, and ask for assistance. Mind you, he might say no given the strict guidelines for biographies now, and I can't say I blame him. The other option would be to start from scratch in your own userspace and write a fully formed stub with all the necessary citations to validate any info given in the article. Bubba hotep 16:21, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

can you tell me the email address of my old account iamtheone so i can loginto it and retrieve my password?

the original was Mr 18 inches or maybe tony duncan. I'm pretty sure it was Mr 18 inches. I don't have a problem with going to all the effort that i did last time. but f-me dead, it will get deleted again. I mean, it was several paragraphs long, had all this data i researched and some turd deleted it cuz they are jelous. whats to stop them again? can you search the delete logs for it? or for anything created by a user called iamtheone? can you tell me what the email address i used to create the iamtheone account? as i have forgoten the email adress so can't retrieve my password :(

fair suck on the sav? i went to trouble researching that original mr 18 inches and it was vandalised. mr 18 inch is a famous porn star and deserves a spot on wiki. u may not like porn, but if that is the case then all porn bio's should be deleted too. why pick on me? just restore the original to somewhere close to the begining with the most data

(edit conflict with below entry) You really need to stop mouthing off if you don't know what your talking about. If NawlinWiki, an Administrator, deleted the article, then it was deleted for what at the time must have been a good reason. Just because you lost your password and were unable to participate any action to stop the deletion doesn't give you a right to run around saying the deleter 'is jealous' or other crap to that affect, or to call people who are following wikipedia policies 'vandals'. Such actions just make people assume bad faith, and think twice when they might otherwise have helped you out with y=what you don't understand. The Kinslayer 16:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

yeah ur a real nice guy kinslayer. uv'e been a help and champ from the very beginning. a real samaritan. 

One of our rules here is Assume good faith. Your assertion that someone deleted the article because they were envious of someone's ridiculously long schlong is wrong and unfair. The article John Holmes (actor) has been on WP since 2002. Now, there are two of us trying to help you, so please be polite. No-one is picking on you. Your article absolutely will not be deleted if it is a proper stub and passes WP:PORN. --Dweller 16:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't have access to the email details for security reasons. You may have to go to the login page, type your old username in and hit "send new password" then check all your email accounts! Basically, it doesn't matter about that account anymore anyway. You can do whatever you need to do from this one now. Bubba hotep 16:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

  ok thanks anyways.

the original from 2005 was a proper stub. i guarentee it. but it was vandalised. is that my fault. my god. you as admins are meant to protect legitimate articles. and should restore the original.

Are you reading half of what these people are telling you? It was already stated earlier that by the time someone noticed the article had been vandalised, it had been vandalised so frequently and extensively that no-one could tell which version was meant to be the correct version. Is that their fault? No. The Kinslayer 16:36, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

are u completely ignorant? then what you do is restore from the earliest point before the vandalism happened. stop trying to incite me. you are unhelpful and rude. go away. your kind of unfriendly input isn't wanted. you are harrassing me and i don't like it.

I've notified NawlinWiki of this conversation. S/he will take a fair-minded approach, as you'd expect. --Dweller 16:38, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

ok thanks for your help. but if it's not restored (the original) i'll not participate in wiki again. my faith is lost. i contributed and have been treated fouly by people like kinslayer by baiting me then blaming me.

You do realise that your constant name calling is about 500% more likely to be seen as baiting then anything I've said? Who started calling me and another legitimate editor vandals because we (rightly) labelled your article for deletion? Who continued removing speedy delete tags despite recieving and acknowledging numerous warnings to stop? Who recreated the article without making a single change (including forgetting to remove the speedy tag? Who accused the deleting admins of being 'jealous' and 'vandals'? And now who is essentially attmepting to blackmail the system by saying 'recreate my article or I quit'? The Kinslayer 16:43, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

why are you harassing and baiting me? go away. thankyou for your cooperation. this has nothing to do with you it is in the hands of admins. my god you are a stalker? please leave me a lone.

Suggestions

Suggestion – because of the constant recreation and subsequent deletion of the article, it has now been salted by another admin. I would suggest that all parties now take a breather from this and this would be the ideal opportunity for you, Majorchaos, to take a step back and prepare to write a proper article, one in which there is no disambiguity as to the notability of it. Because, it will have to be good now to convince someone to unsalt the ground again. We have all tried to give you advice, and I think Kinslayer is understandably annoyed at your stubbornness. At the end of the day, they were correct to speedy it in its unfinished state. But please, learn from today and do it right next time, because if I see it again, after all this advice given, I will delete it myself. Bubba hotep 17:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

If you'd like to start working on the article, click here User:Majorchaos/Sandbox and work on it on that page. If you'd like me to take a look and see if I think it passes WP:PORN, drop me a line here. When it's ready, an admin can be asked to unsalt the article space and move the article there. If it's clearly passing WP:PORN, they will have no problem.

Alternatively, you could politely ask NawlinWiki to recreate your original article, but if it clearly fails WP:PORN s/he is more likely to agree to post it to your Sandbox to be worked up. It'd only get deleted again by someone else otherwise. --Dweller 17:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Just a quick note. WP:PORNBIO is the page I think you are looking for here. WP:PORN is about the overall stand of Wikipedia on pornography. --Onorem 17:20, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Oops. Sorry. --Dweller 17:22, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

well can i have access to the original? i don't want to research it all again as the data came from obscure places and i wouldn't find it. ahhh don't worry. i couldn't be bothered. the intellectuals have won. iv'e had enuff. enjoy ur wiki toy. it's clearly not for people like us (the unwashed lower classes) i thought i would contribute, my original gets vandalised and i'm to blame.... salut...

I'm sorry you feel that way, I genuinely am. Some of us were fighting your corner then, but if you are going to give it up, perhaps it wasn't that worthwhile after all. Plus, if the references were "obscure places...[you] wouldn't find", then maybe the subject wasn't that notable really as the paramount criteria for inclusion is that sources are verifiable by all who chose to check. Anyway, if you change your mind, please heed all that has been said. Bubba hotep 19:38, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

thanks for your help, i appreciate that what you and dweller were doing. But as for whether Mr 18 Inches is notable or not I can assure you he is. In the porn context and human biology for that matter he is a freak of nature. For your consideration, take the fact that all university scholars and documents on the topic of penis size re; kersny report (spelling) and all university type papers have the largest recorded male penis length as 12 inches. Even your wiki states that. Now I doubt that Tony T is 18 inches but even at a cursory glance from the links I supplied in the original article which included pictures and movie clips demonstrated that he is at least 14 inches.

The whole idea of encyclopedias et al is to broaden peoples horizons and my Mr 18 inches did that by demonstrating that university papers are way out of date as here is a living example.

I couldn't be bothered because my original was vandalized to a point that it was deleted, whats to stop it from happening again, and again?

I tried and made a STUB entry for mr 18 inches and I was going to add to it and its repeatedly deleted. There is no use of me sand boxing it as who the hell knows it exists in my sand box and therefor no one can contribute to the stub. The original mr 18 inches had some people that were contributing to it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Majorchaos (talk • contribs)

If he's notable, sources shouldn't be hard to come by. You're not a martyr for "the unwashed classes". A stub entry doesn't mean you type someone's name and leave the article for others to fill in. The fact that someone is notable doesn't mean you can ignore rules and remove tags because you created and abandoned an article years ago and now want it back. Either take the time to create the article correctly or don't. If he is notable, someone else will do it correctly soon enough if you don't. --Onorem 02:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Someone will create the article soon enough? Will they now... That someone was me. You're in no position to tell me what i am a martyr for or not a martyr for, wiki GOD. I am what I say I am. If you don't like facts, go put it in your bong and smoke it little man.

The reality is I am a martyr for the unwashed masses and tried to contribute to this wiki some information your little intellectual brain wasn't aware of. example, if i had of asked you wiki GOD what is the largest male penis, you would have searched your little wiki and university papers and concluded. 12 inches good sir. Well i tried to enlighten your little world.

I had more than just his name and i was adding to the info and it was deleted.

And the information you just added demonstrates you are a troll. You added nothing new and it is clear you are baiting me. Go away you troll.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Majorchaos (talk • contribs)

I would think my linking of the Answers.com article that was based off of your original contribution would have led you to believe that I wasn't intending to be a "troll". People that are notable have articles. If you don't feel like creating it now because you feel you've been wronged somehow, who cares? If he matters, he'll have an article. If you are the only someone who cares enough to create an article, he's not notable enough to have one. I'm no wiki-god. I've never claimed to be any type of wiki-god. If you had asked me what the largest male penis was, I would have responded, "who the **** cares?". --Onorem 03:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I just read this whole thread and noticed your link, thanks. That is the only positive contribution you have made. You and your mate kinslayer have been baiting me other than that.

As for your who the **** cares, well that clearly demonstrates you see yourself as a wiki-god. As any information that doesn't pass your seal of approval is deemed unworthy and thus explains your negative input and no doubt you were a key player in the deleting. Thanks, you have shown your negative hand with that comment.

Feel i have been wronged? Ok, i'll do a search on your username and start vandalizing your contributions to wiki and see how you feel? I'll do so on the merit of I don't find your topics interesting. I have noticed that kinslayer has a pension for ghosts and is active in a ghost sighting topic. what the F*** there are no such things as ghosts, so i might just go vandalize all his topics shall I?

Just becuase you are not interested in my topic doesn't make it unworthy or un-notable for wiki. STOP being a wiki-god and a troll. Your'e only positive contribution has been the answer.com link...

My warnings were based completely off of your tag removal against Wikipedia policy and had absolutely nothing to do personally with you or the topic at hand. There is no "seal of approval" factor, other than the 5 pillars which should be followed by everyone. I was a key player in the deleting of an article which said, "Mr 18 inches STUB." I'm ok with that not remaining as an article. I'm also ok with an article for this actor being here. He seems notable. Just because he is notable doesn't mean the article doesn't need to have a minimum amount of information and at least 1 reliable source.

I'd welcome your investigation of all of my edits. Please feel free to question anything I have ever added to Wikipedia. I have a feeling you'll find there isn't much I've added to the mainspace that isn't properly sourced.

Even though you probably don't believe it, I do hope that you will stay and contribute to the encyclopedia. There are rules though, and they apply to everyone. --Onorem 03:48, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

My tag removing was based on attacks on my article. but what ever.... as for the rules, yeah GO rules. Rules rock!!! these rules are good for you intilectual types who make careers out of being pedantic and prolific writers. Us unwashed lower classes work at a slower pace... I attempted to follow rules as my original article from 2005 started as just a name and a stub tag and i was learning how to put html tags and dress up the article to make it look more appealing and put in information. I put in time to learn how others made their articles look good and was replicating it with mine.

It was a work in progress and i was using it as a way of learning so I could contribute. Sorry for not being up to your lofty intellectual standards. It is clear that my type aren't wanted here and anything people like us contribute will be deleted as not meeting your lofty standards... so enjoy your little wiki where only the masters of humanity have affective input as people like me aren't able to meet your lofty outcomes and are promptly deleted... thus my martyr for the lower class comment...

Chill

Hey cmon, Majorchaos. There's a bunch of us now trying to help you. But adopting an attitude of being victimised isn't going to get the article reinstated. Have you dropped NawlinWiki a line, like I suggested? I'm pleased you've not gone away - I've invested a lot of time in trying to support you and nothing would please me more than seeing a) your article recreated and b) you being a contributor to Wikipedia. However, throwing around accusations of well-intentioned people being a "troll" etc isn't going to help. Click here User talk:NawlinWiki and politely request that the admin recreates an early version of the article in your user space. My guess is s/he'll agree. I'll help you from there. --Dweller 09:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

thanks for your help, i do appreciate it. your a helpful and decent fella.. i don't want to contribute here anymore but thanks for your offer of help, time and effort. take care...