User talk:Rypcord/Archive 4

Speedy deletion of George Feigley

Please do not make personal attacks. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Beeblbrox (talk) 01:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Hello, Rypcord. You have new messages at Beeblbrox's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition was deleted under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.Jon513 (talk) 01:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MiniCity

Rypcord, I have deleted MiniCity under speedy deletion criteria A7. Marasmusine (talk) 13:32, 16 September 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Hello, Rypcord. You have new messages at Captain-tucker's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hummelstown, Pennsylvania

Hello Rypcord - I have removed your nomination of Hummelstown, Pennsylvania from the WP:GAN page. The nomination had not been properly completed, as 1) Nominators are not supposed to place "under review" tags under their own nominations and 2) There was no corresponding GAN tag on the article talk page. Also, the article is barely past a Start-class, as it has no references, for which it has been failed twice in the past. I would suggest completing some more work on the referencing of the article and making sure it is complete, then renominating it following the directions at the top of the GAN page. Thank you! Dana boomer (talk) 13:05, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template

I don't think the template will even last, last time we had a template like that it got deleted. I see no reason for it to go on WrestleMania pages anyways since the template is about the venues. That means it would go on the articles for the venues, not the events. TJ Spyke 19:16, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But since the event is mentioned; shouldn't it also be included there as well? Seems to make sense that way as well. The Rypcord. 19:17, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe so. Would we include the WWE Title template on every PPV article its defended at? The template is only about the venues. TJ Spyke 20:13, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to WrestleMania XXVI, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. TJ Spyke 16:59, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Terry Farrell (actress)

What part of my edit summary did you not understand? Dismas|^(talk) 13:38, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The part where I'm getting the source. Chill out pal. Considering there's tons of other "facts" and what-nots in that article (and millions of others on here) that don't have a citation. So just simmer down there thought-police. The Rypcord. 15:31, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Brown bailout

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Brown bailout, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Non-notable web campaign.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. TN X Man 14:22, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Harrisburg

When a franshise ceases operations, it is dead. A new Heat team would be a brand new team even if it "inherited" the records of the old team. When the Baltimore Spirit took on the name of the Baltimore Blast, they weren't the same tea, but a new team with the same name. The same thing happened when the Seattle Sounders FC came into existence. They didn't revive the old NASL team or even the USL team. The precedent on Wikipedia is that new teams that take on old team names get new pages and are separate entities. The LaRaza are not the same team that played in the CISL and WISL, for example. KitHutch (talk) 15:58, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So what would the new page name be? Harrisburg Heat (NISL)? The Rypcord. 21:03, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Tom Braunlich

I have nominated Tom Braunlich, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Braunlich. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. I42 (talk) 07:04, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

October 2009

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 WWE Hell in a Cell, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. 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. Dcheagle (talk) 01:06, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GAN page

Hello Rypcord. Please be more careful in your edits to the Good Article Nominations page. I have twice within the past few weeks had to undo edits of yours that removed other nominations while editing your own. I have been assuming good faith and considering these removals to be accidental, but repeating such mistakes gives the impression that you are conciously removing other editors' nominations. If you have any questions about the page, please feel free to ask me! Dana boomer (talk) 21:11, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wow, sorry. I was just trying to correct how my name looked on the page. Terribly sorry! The Rypcord. 04:36, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hummelstown GAN

Hi; I've quick-failed the good article nomination of Hummelstown, Pennsylvania. You can see why here. Thank you for your work on the article, and if you decide to improve and renominate (which I strongly hope you do), feel free to ask me for a look-over. Additionally, any questions/concerns can be put on my talk page. Cheers, Mm40 (talk) 19:54, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've given some more comments on the article talk page. I'll watch that page, so if you have any more question they can be asked on that page. Cheers, Mm40 (talk) 22:30, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hummelstown, Pennsylvania

Please stop just adding the article name into lists on the WP:GAN page. There are clear instructions at the top of that page on how to go about nominating. Bare links will just be removed and have been. Looking at the article, little seems to have been done since the last failure. I suggest you get on with improving it before you nominate through the proprer procedure. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:22, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Brown bailout

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Brown bailout. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brown bailout. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:09, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Hummelstown

Honestly, I do not know too much about Hummelstown to the extent that I can improve the town's article. In addition, I am busy working on improving various road articles. If I had the time and knowledge, I would help, but that is not the case here unfortunately. ---Dough 48 72 16:25, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I just thought since you edited the page you knew a good bit about it. The Rypcord. 00:16, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria for inclusion to List of 21st century earthquakes

Hi Rypcord, there was a discussion recently on Talk:List of 21st century earthquakes about criteria for inclusion. The agreement (I know there was only two of us taking part, but if no-one else joins in what can you do) was for 7+ magnitude quakes and more than one death to be the main criteria, I don't think that the event that you added met. If you want to re-open that discussion then please go ahead. Mikenorton (talk) 17:27, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

July 2010

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Template:Star_Wars. Thank you. TheRealFennShysa (talk) 19:11, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Template:Star Wars. 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 several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.

Please do not revert good-faith contributions with the edit summary "rv vandalism", especially when the version you reverted appears to be preferred on the talkpage. I have protected the template for the time being. Black Kite (t) (c) 22:50, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Piggy-backing on this: a) please stop marking non-minor edits as minor and b) re. Decipher Inc, please respond to the talk-page discussion I've initiated there. If your ongoing edit-warring persists, esp. across multiple articles, it is quite likely you will face an editing block. --EEMIV (talk) 01:57, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]