User talk:Newport Backbay

Hello!

Re:

It's not that I'm taking it personally; it's that I'm concerned you are wasting your time. If the article demonstrates notability, which it does, there is no need to nominate it for deletion. Also, I get the feeling you don't understand the tags you are using well enough to use them effectively. Chubbles (talk) 17:14, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto, you are the one making it personal.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 17:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Hi there, I noticed you've put several articles up for proposed deletion. It's good to see more people doing these necessary maintenance tasks. But in future, can you please provide a reason for deletion? In case you're not familiar with it yet the way to include a reason in the Prod template is

((subst:prod|Your reason for deletion))

but replace the round brackets with curly ones, obviously. Cheers, and keep up the good work. Reyk _YO! 01:02, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Being courteous

Hi, the instructions on PRODding at WP:PROD say "Although not required, it is considered courteous to notify the article's creator ...", but I see you didn't inform the newbie creator of Turan Information Agency when you PRODded their article. Please do so: it lets them know their article is at risk and gives them a chance to upgrade the article. A very new editor might not even know about Watch lists etc. I've put the notice on their page now. PamD (talk) 11:37, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it's not required, don't hassle me over it. Newport Backbay (talk) 19:55, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another Prod comment

A suggestion: you may want to wait more than 5 minutes after an article is created to Prod it.--Rockfang (talk) 17:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I prodded it rather than afd it. Stuff that in your sock. Newport Backbay (talk) 19:55, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep it civil, Newport Backbay. Thor Malmjursson (talk) 22:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In reply to your comment on my talk page, no I don't always meddle. In fact, I don't meddle full stop. What I do is abide by the rules and as a recent change patroller, I warn people when I consider their actions inappropriate. Telling someone to "stuff that in your sock" is not rude, but its not exactly polite either. If you have any issues with what I did, you are welcome to raise them with an administrator. Thor Malmjursson (talk) 23:18, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Boris Collingwood

You're being very quick. If I create a page and put the "under construction" template on it, and say in the summary that references and categories are to come, then is it helpful to put "unreferenced" and "uncategorised" on it within a minute, so that when I come back with the references I get an edit clash with you and lose the work I've done? Give us a chance, will you? Johnlp (talk) 20:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And I'm suggesting that if someone puts "under construction" on a page, you back off for a while to allow construction to take place. Johnlp (talk) 20:22, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CIVIL

Hi Newport Backbay, I just want to stop by to let you know that here at Wikipedia we have strong policies against uncivil comments and/or personal attacks (in hopes of creating a constructive environment). Comments such as this and this are unwelcome and clearly unhelpful. I urge you to think before you click "save page" because continuing to violate civility policies will result in a block.

Cheers,

Tiptoety ^talk 23:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tournament of Roses Parade

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Tournament of Roses Parade, did not appear to be constructive and has been removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Ucla90024 (talk) 18:32, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So totally bogus. Newport Backbay (talk) 18:48, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Ucla90024 (talk) 19:30, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Do you mind talking here Talk:Tournament of Roses Parade ? - Part of dispute resolution is talking to the guy you disagree with - While there, please state why you prefer the pictures organized in the manner you prefer. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:24, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to support Ucla90024 in his effort to improve Pasadena Tournament of Roses pages. He has consistently made improvements. While layout style can be improved on, deletions should be discussed first. We should be here to build, not tear down. --Saltysailor (talk) 23:19, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The first step in dispute resolution is to focus on the content and not the character of the other editors. Please assume good faith of Ucla. You could find other places in the article to place the images, or you can start a gallery section and place extra images there. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:12, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Peter McKenzie (football)

The article Peter McKenzie (football) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable. Chairman of a semi-professional Scottish Football League club.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 22:41, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Triunfo Pass for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Triunfo Pass is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Triunfo Pass until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Cssiitcic (talk) 02:43, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

January 2012

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to Boney Peak‎ does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Was Santa Monica Mountains wrong? Maybe you could replace it with the proper entry. Or maybe you made a mistake? Santa Monica Mountains links to Boney Peak so I am restoring the entry; please edit again (with an edit summary) if wrong. —EncMstr (talk) 01:04, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Indian Reservation Roads Program

Category:Indian Reservation Roads Program, which you created, has been nominated for deletion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.RevelationDirect (talk) 19:58, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:LULAC logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:LULAC logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:20, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]