User talk:Spastic on elastic

Speedy deletion of CIDESCO

A tag has been placed on CIDESCO requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. 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 that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (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. Excirial^{(Talk,Contribs)} 20:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CIDESCO

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of CIDESCO, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.cidesco.com/index.php?menu=1. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 20:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The question might equally be, why are you repeatedly recreating the page I'm deleting? It was tagged as a copy vio, didn't demonstrate its importance, and read like blatant advertising. Exploding Boy (talk) 20:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Latest CIDESCO article deleted as blatant copy vio. If you really want to write this article, please write it yourself and find some reliable external sources to use. Exploding Boy (talk) 21:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of NatalieDee

I have nominated NatalieDee, 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/NatalieDee. 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. --Dynaflow babble 15:58, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RFAr

Look, I can tell you right now that any RFAr on this will be rejected. You haven't even, as far as I can tell, taken the matter to WP:DRV, which is the first stop in deletion debate appeals. Phil Sandifer (talk) 23:05, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFAR

I have raised a request for arbitration re: NatalieDee article merged with Married to the Sea See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration-- Spastic on elastic (talk) 22:58, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No you haven't. Your contribs as of this moment don't show you ever touching Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. Note that arbitration is the last step in dispute resolution (I wasn't even aware that there was an actual, bona fide, earth-shaking dispute about that article). Please talk to those you disagree with first before attempting to drag everybody involved into wikicourt. I'd like to hear what you believe the crux of this dispute is. Get back to me on that. Thanks. --Dynaflow babble 23:11, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have just finished putting in my request for arbitration, you were just very quick to check! I have tried to discuss this matter on the articles talk page and Afd page, however no one replied to my reasoning and sources and a decision to merge was made without me and in error.Spastic on elastic (talk) 23:20, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You should realize that this is sort of like appealing a traffic citation to the Supreme Court. The place you should go to contest the merge of the article is WP:DRV. --Dynaflow babble 23:25, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I note that you only allowed a little under 35 hours to elapse with your message unanswered at Talk:NatalieDee before you went straight for Arbitration. Things just don't work that fast here. People are on different continents, they have real-world things to do, etc.; you can't expect instantaneous responses from everyone. Patience. --Dynaflow babble 23:32, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate that these things take time but it wasn't the fact that no one replied, rather that the decision was rushed through by someone and the merge was made without further discussion or any discussion at all regarding my findings on the website's notability and the new sources I found. I was also unsure of what path to take as there is no dispute to resolve between users (only users ignoring users) and the article was never deleted (only merged).Spastic on elastic (talk) 23:37, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You weren't ignored at the AfD (which was up for nearly a week); your arguments just didn't prevail. You were also not ignored at Talk:NatalieDee; you simply didn't wait for an answer. Wikipedia:There is no deadline. --Dynaflow babble 23:45, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your username

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope not to seem unfriendly or make you feel unwelcome, but I noticed your username, and I am concerned that it might not meet Wikipedia's username policy for the following reason: "Spastic" is a pejorative term in many parts of the world, with negative connotations for those with cerebral palsy and associated conditions. Please consider changing your username.. After you look over that policy, could we discuss that concern here?

I'd appreciate learning your own views, for instance your reasons for wanting this particular name, and what alternative username you might accept that avoids raising this concern.

You have several options freely available to you:

If you can relieve my concern through discussing it here, I can stop worrying about it.
If the two of us can't agree here, we can ask for help through Wikipedia's dispute resolution process, such as requesting comments from other Wikipedians. Wikipedia administrators usually abide by agreements reached through this process.
You can keep your contributions history under a new username. Visit Wikipedia:Changing username and follow the guidelines there.

Thank you. Black Kite 00:21, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I was shocked that this username had been here this long (no offence SoE, maybe you didn't realise how politically correct we are on WP, but the word 'spastic' is not often used nowadays, especially on elastic? Eh? A person with cerebral palsy on a string (?!) :) Sticky Parkin 18:20, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw your comment on BK's page, why not choose a name that's less offensive to millions of people? Maybe 'spastic' is ok where you are (but as you say, you were aware that it isn't elsewhere or to many people probably even where you live. You knew of the other meaning/feeling about it regardless of where you are. The article on spastic discusses the controversy over the term- i.e. their presence doesn't endorse it's use, quite the opposite, it says it's controversial. Sticky Parkin 18:30, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration request denied

Your arbitration request has been closed as denied.[1] You will probably want to ask for the deletion to be reviewed.--Tznkai (talk) 01:39, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This account, Spastic on elastic, has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia, because your username does not meet our username policy. This block is only regarding your username—it is not a judgment of either you personally or your contributions.

Names should not be offensive, disruptive, promotional, misleading, or related to a "real-world" group or organization. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account.

Please choose a new account name that meets our policy guidelines. However, do not create a new account if you wish to credit your existing contributions to a new name through a username change. To request a username change:

Add {{unblock-un|your new username here}} on your user talk page. You should be able to edit this talk page even though you are blocked. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "E-mail this user" on their talk page.
At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a list of names that have already been taken. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Changing username.

If you feel that you were blocked in error, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Cirt (talk) 23:45, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]