User talk:Selmaflora294

Selmaflora294, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Selmaflora294! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Theopolisme (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:15, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Hello, Selmaflora294, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:36, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

re: your message on my talk page

You may wish to consider whether or not making claims about what other editors believe or are influenced by is accurate before you make public proclamations about it. The assertion of any impact on another editor is completely untrue.

In addition the removal of content, including "sourced" content, that is placed in a way that creates an impression that the sources make claims that they in fact do not expressly make is not allowed. I am willing to bet the of the 25 million who watched the game, 5 watched because of George being involved: His mother, his sister, his PR agent, his significant other and his father, although its probably closer to 4 because his father was going to watch the game anyway. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:36, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

my bets may just be based on assumptions, BUT SO ARE YOURS. and until you have a reliable source that specifically makes the connection between the general viewership of the game and George, you cannot insert such a claim into the article. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:34, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

what a ridiculous assumption. the PR agent obviously fed them the standard promo pack. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:48, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1) it would NOT sway peoples' !votes, as has already been pointed out to you. and 2) and if it was something that would sway votes, it would be even more improper to have it in the article because it violates basic content principal of WP:SYN - making or implying connections or conclusions that the reliable sources do not explicitly make.

Please revert yourself and remove the improper content from the article.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:04, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

no i do not agree that my removal of improperly sourced claims from the article had any negative impact on a valid outcome at the AfD. All valid !votes at the AfD are those that judge the article based on whether or not the sources properly support WP:N, and the fact that improperly sourced content was not there when people were looking at the article could not possibly negatively affect the AfD outcome. As a comparison, the fact that I removed my Toyota from the street would not have a negative effect on people who were asked to count how many mooses were on the street. It could only have a positive effect by clearing out the sightlines. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:24, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1) WP:SYN is NOT a "technicality" - it is a primary factor in one of the 3 major content policies. 2) The person has [specifically stated that even knowing the 25 million viewers of the game has ZERO impact on their opinion, so please please please stop flogging that very dead and very abused dead horse.

you seem to be under the impression that the number of people who have seen him sing is somehow going to help establish notability. It is not. What establishes notability is that third party reliable sources have covered the subject in a significant manner so please focus your efforts to show that because i am done talking about football viewers. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:43, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

please do not edit war

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:49, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing going on, you prematurely have come to conclusions. Just like you did about the viewership of the game. You seem to be someone who jumps the gun on things. Relax, take things a little less seriously. Selmaflora294 (talk) 02:40, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

re your edit and edit summary 1) you are continuing to edit war 2) admins have no special content authority, they merely have a mop that they can use to block people who edit war. Please revert yourself. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:48, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

George Komsky

my reply here Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:29, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ngoesseringer. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:44, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]