User talk:NigelHowells

Your arbitration case on Briefsism will not be entertained. Please do not post your request again. Thatcher131 18:22, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Kate Phelan

Hello NigelHowells,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Kate Phelan for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. SmileBlueJay97 talk 16:36, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Donny Phelan

Hello, NigelHowells. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Donny Phelan, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Donny Phelan to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.

Thanks, Crazy131 (talk) 16:36, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2014

Hello, I'm Bahooka. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Mary Barra, but you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Needs a better reference. Bahooka (talk) 17:06, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jana Phelan

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Jana Phelan requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Dawn Bard (talk) 17:07, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Obama slush fund

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Obama slush fund, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. The page has been nominated for deletion, in accordance with Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Bahooka (talk) 17:09, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete nomination

Speedy deletion nomination of 195.188.50.200 (IP address)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on 195.188.50.200 (IP address) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Jersey92 (talk) 17:20, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete nomination

Speedy deletion nomination of Made Up (beauty salon)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Made Up (beauty salon) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Jersey92 (talk) 17:21, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Urbis Evolo

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Urbis Evolo, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. The page has been nominated for deletion, in accordance with Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Bahooka (talk) 17:29, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined, but you can avoid problems like this by including references in the article when you first post it. This one needs some more, independent, references to establish WP:Notability. JohnCD (talk) 20:23, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2014

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:39, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:50, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

NigelHowells (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

OK, so I'm on wi-fi that's public here, my hotel's... either way, I'd like to apologise. I wasn't trying to put hoaxes in, they were sourced, and my articles such as Donny Phelan were sourced, not hoaxes. I was trying to help. Americans in the United Kingdom was a constructive edit.

Decline reason:

Both in 2007 with your first edit, and today, you plunged straight into the depths of Wikipedia's appeal processes, in relation to articles (Briefsism and John Bambenek) which were plagued with SPAs and sockpuppetry. Have you used other accounts? JohnCD (talk) 21:57, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Proposed deletion of Weston Green (Katy Perry concert)

The article Weston Green (Katy Perry concert) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced, non-notable future event per WP:CRYSTAL.

While all constructive 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. Bahooka (talk) 00:05, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Gavin Neale

The article Gavin Neale has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NFOOTY. Might qualify for BLPPROD: the one source it has doesn't really seem to exist.

While all constructive 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. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 00:47, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of pizza shops in Ontario for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of pizza shops in Ontario 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/List of pizza shops in Ontario 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 10:14, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of spammers

Hello, I'm Woodroar. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on List of spammers, but you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Woodroar (talk) 10:32, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Goodbye

A brief perusal of your edits makes it clear that you are here for the lolz not to contribute in any serious fashion. It's also obvious this isn't your first account. I have blocked your account indefinitely. Spartaz ^Humbug! 10:34, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

NigelHowells (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

OK, so I am on my hotel's wi-fi, but I have edited here before, but not as an account (so the blocking admin was right, as far as it goes in terms of me editing before), only IP addresses, see this diff, here and here and my oldest edit. I am from Wigan, but work in the Northwest, did some original research on here back then, but have changed. I am trying to edit constructively. Donny Phelan, Kate Phelan etc. were explicitly not hoaxes, they were sourced.

Decline reason:

The "List of pizza shops" is sufficient enough to uphold this block as nothing but a disruptive account the panda ₯’ 11:29, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Any admin willing to consider this nonsense should look closely at this users deleted contributions. Thanks. Spartaz ^Humbug! 10:43, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh what about Mascotguy? Spartaz ^Humbug! 10:43, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Suggestion this is homeontherange Spartaz ^Humbug! 11:16, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am not the "homeontherange" user, I edited from English IPs before now, I'm from Wigan, see, and I was writing about fairly local things. So what if I edit about various things?? Also, loads of people edit from public computers. Two users with things being edited that are the same, doesn't mean it's the same person. I will edit constructively in the future. --NigelHowells (talk) 11:34, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- You actually outed yourself in these two edits as well. Quack, quack! Nymf (talk) 13:30, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

NigelHowells (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I will edit constructively. Apologies for the pizza shop edits. I have done wrong, need help to edit constructively. Former IP editor.

Decline reason:

No credible explanation of editing history and no credible indication of future constructive editing SpinningSpark 12:02, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

NigelHowells (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I promise to make constructive edits in the future, and if unblocked, will answer to a Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User:NigelHowells if unblocked

Decline reason:

Just based on your long "career", I am disinclined to unblock you, and considering the discoveries by Spartaz and Nymf, reported above, there's no way in Hell anyone will grant your request. Favonian (talk) 16:46, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.