User talk:Mitch macdonald

Barber hop

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Barber hop, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Barber hop. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Joyous! | Talk 17:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: Pierre McGuire

Hi, while I certainly agree that McGuire's style lends itself to a great deal of criticism, Wikipedia has very strict rules regarding biographies of living persons, specifically that unsourced or poorly sourced commentary that is likely to be controversial should be removed. That is not to say that we want to hide such details, only that they have to be strongly sourced. Given that the link you provided is to a blog, it does not meet our reliable source standards, thus I was compelled to remove it. This certainly is not a criticism of your contribution, only that the section needs to be sourced to something more reliable. If you can find, for example, a newspaper or magazine article discussing controversies surrounding McGuire, please feel free to use that to rebuild such a section. Thanks, Reso lute 16:00, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On the first link you mentioned, the forum post itself is not a good source, however it does reference a Globe and Mail article. If you can find more information on that article (specifically the author) that would be an excellent source. The second link to the International Herald Tribune is excellent. Using his coaching record to argue he has no credibility is not a good argument, imo. That introduces personal opinion to the matter. Besides, Wayne Gretzky's coaching record is pretty damn awful, but everybody will listen to his opinions on hockey. ;o) The first two sources make for a good start to such a section, however just be sure that what you write is directly supported by the source. i.e.: ensure that it is stated that the Globe article is a reader poll. I'll be happy to help with any reference formatting. Cheers, Reso lute 17:31, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fan sites and online petitions are generally not considered reliable sources, so I would tend to avoid those. Reso lute 02:47, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As with anything else on Wikipedia, any edits you make will last until someone else changes them. I'd say to write your section based on the newspaper and magazine links you provided. So long as what is written is referenced by those articles, it should be ok. Reso lute 15:28, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Pierre McGuire, you may be blocked from editing. Hirolovesswords (talk) 07:46, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 02:43, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 03:07, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

June 2012

Hello, I'd like to inform you that the repeated insertion of material in the Pierre McGuire article that has been determined to be in violation of the BLP policy is sufficient grounds for this account to be blocked. See Wikipedia:Blocking policy.

If, however, you find better sources to cite that explicitly back up your claims, and it is written in a neutral point of view, then you may restore the gist of your edits.

Regards. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:43, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent violations of Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons. For over three years, your only editing has been sporadically but persistently conducting a campaign to vilify a person (in your own words, "denouncing him"). You have repeatedly inserted negative comments, which have been unsourced, sourced to sources that fall well short of saying what you say, or sourced to unreliable sources, including unambiguous hate sites (in your own words "anti-pierre web sites"). You have repeatedly had it explained to you why your editing is unacceptable, but have nevertheless persisted.. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:23, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]