User talk:WikiSkeptic

Welcome!

Hello, WikiSkeptic, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Deb 21:39, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of A.O. Smith Corporation

A tag has been placed on A.O. Smith Corporation 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 company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Paste (talk) 16:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of PHH Corporation

A tag has been placed on PHH Corporation 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 company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Rob Banzai (talk) 17:13, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PHH Corportation

Hi WikiSkeptic. Looks like Rbanzi had a change of heart and beat me to it. Let me know if you need a third opinion on anything else, though. Olaf Davis | Talk 08:57, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Sorry, but I have my hands full. Cannot help everyone. it's not possible to be everywhere always. --Ludvikus (talk) 18:18, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support. Very much appreciated. --Ludvikus (talk) 18:42, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;" |rowspan="2" valign="middle" | [[Image:Peace Barnstar 6.png|100px]] |rowspan="2" | |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Barnstar of Peace''' |- |style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | I award you this Barnstar for your support on the side of Peace & Righteousness. Thanx again! [[User:Ludvikus|Ludvikus]] ([[User talk:Ludvikus|talk]]) 17:25, 9 May 2008 (UTC) |} You've changed what I said. So I'm taking it back. --Ludvikus (talk) 21:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i'm assuming good faith, and waiting for you to show where I changed something you said. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 21:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Columbia College

Thanks for the reminder. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 17:25, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Provocations at User talk:Ludvikus

Please tread lightly. El_C 20:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note that if you continue to attack other editors (accusing them of "lynching"), you will be censured. Follow dispute resolution, instead. El_C 20:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

El_C is right regarding language usage. Take a break. Restrain your lanuage. Make Peace. --Ludvikus (talk) 21:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's all taken out of context. Go see how User:Appletrees operates and then come back and say that. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 21:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You used that language in a way that offended that other person who came to me for help. Why you put that reference to a "masXXX" on his page is not right. You are welcome to my home page to discuss your concern. But be very careful in the use of language against a 3rd person. --Ludvikus (talk) 21:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS: context Yes. That can happen. --Ludvikus (talk) 21:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, than delete away and keep your page as clean as you like. But let's not all consider El C some sort of paragon of Wikietiquette... look at "You gotta stop now. Thx. El_C 20:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)" the very least aggressive of his comments and handling of a situation with a n00b. Looks at his version's caption for the picture of the girls as if to drive home "faces faces faces, hey islamic fundamentalists, we are putting faces of girls on wikipedia nah nah nah NAH nah" -WikiSkeptic (talk) 21:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Listen. I had practically an edit war with El_C. But now I'm treating him the way you treated me. He happens to be correct about your implication that that editor was like those who did you know what in Palestine. Also - it was not me who cleaned up my Page - it was El_C. He didn't even let me know. But I remember what you wrote. Also, that person came to me for help because he saw that I had given you a Barnstar for your defense of me. Now I am on your side too. Please listen carefully to what I'm telling you. --Ludvikus (talk) 21:25, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And now your saying something of the same kind against El_C regarding "girls" - are you unaware that there are 1,000 of Administrators at Wikipedia who will lock you out for that? Take a break - and stop now criticising El_C in such harsh way (I may be too generous in discribing your use of language). Why don't you send me an eMail - there you can say anything you want about anybody. I'll try to find a solution for you. Do you know how to access my Email? --Ludvikus (talk) 21:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you actually read his edit in question? Take a look at his draft: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kabul&oldid=211331989 . "General faces of women in Kabul."--and this is a situation where context is only more damaging--User:Bistiks is expressing concern about violation of Islamic codes of depiction of the human form as the edit record reveals. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 21:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My edit had nothing to do with that image, it was about the removal of another pic ("This is appropiate picture with privacy for females"). El_C 21:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't dispute that. But we all know that when you're edit-battling, if not quite edit-warring, with somebody, it's the totality of the draft you present that represents your viewpoint, and unnecessarily presenting a picture of human beings waiting as "the faces of these girls" may be seen as aggressive by the other party. Even as the draft stands, all the caption titles are like "FEMALE students waiting." "FEMALE students in the computer room;" can you imagine the page on Berlin or London reading like that? -WikiSkeptic (talk) 21:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot be expected to review an entire article every single time I review an isolated edit therein. This was in a wholly different section. El_C 21:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be seen as a true commitment to NPOV if you altered the captions on the photos to not be "female this" "female that." Maybe it's more than what's absolutely called for, but isn't that the beginning of a true diplomatic solution? -WikiSkeptic (talk) 21:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you understand the gravity of your "lynching" attack and why it will not be tolerated a second time. El_C 21:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the word I used was "techno-lynching" if we need to be precise. And I believe it was used as a description of text and not as a direct comment to an individual.

<aside>One irony of all this is that the original creator of the Peace barnstar was eventually banned for being too aggressive. Look it up. </aside>-WikiSkeptic (talk) 22:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No one was banned. Ludvikus is restricted from moves for a little while due to many, many problems.
That Barnstar was created last year, by another user and has no bearing to anything.
Just because you were given a barnstar, is no reason to avoid scrutiny and blindly defend the user who awarded you with it.
Hyphenating the word techno before lynching, in that context, is just as bad. El_C 22:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Barnstars, User:Defender_911, original creator of the Peace Barnstar, was banned.-WikiSkeptic (talk) 22:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And this is pertinent to what again? You said the irony was Ludvikus haviing created the barsntar, I just point out it was created in August 2007 by someone who was not him. El_C 22:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let me talk to WikiSkeptic - maybe I can resolve matters. He's now talking to me too. I think I can calm things down. If I cannot, I shall return here. --Ludvikus (talk) 22:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If WS is going to continue with the "lynching" attacks, he will be blocked without further warning. El_C 22:12, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean "continue?" Where do I use it more than once? -WikiSkeptic (talk) 22:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here and here. El_C 22:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's disingenuous. THose comments were made simultaneously. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 22:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And you continue to defend the attack, that's a problem, too. El_C 22:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I do give you full license to delete away whatever. It won't change systematic bias on Battle of Jutland or the fact that there's several different individuals who are claiming on Irgun that certain bank-robbers (and that's not an insult, that's just a cold, emotionless description) are actually "young Irgun members." -WikiSkeptic (talk) 22:24, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what any of that is about. I only insist that you adhere to our no attacks and civility policies. El_C 22:25, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But since he had written on my Page, El_C, don't you think you should have informed me about the incident as well? I had no idea what was going on. You could have given me some opportunity to handle it. Instead, I think, you've been spilling gasoline on the fire - as you've done with me. You take sides too quickly. And you're treating the man like a child. Now stop it already. He's got your message! --Ludvikus (talk) 22:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You just don't know when to stop, do you? El_C 22:56, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Warhol & Umberto Eco & Metaphor

I think it would do you good to research the above - it seems you are unaware of your effect on other people. You create an environment on your homepage designed in such a way as alienate people from you. Everything you do there has NO CONTEXT. Right now you're not effective as a soldier at all. You sould also look up The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, - maybe rent it out. --Ludvikus (talk) 22:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC) PS: How would you deal with me if you knew I was English? --Ludvikus (talk) 22:48, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK Professor. <friendlily> However, this reading list is going to take some time to digest. re: Israel--how can you write, I support them 100%??? did even you even read about that massacre? and the King Dzavid bombing???-WikiSkeptic (talk) 22:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You got that title right! Don't engage the MP's at Wikipedia - that's all some of them know how to do (notice that no one knows who I mean)! --Ludvikus (talk) 22:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS1: Come to my page for a moment, soldier. See what's happening now. --Ludvikus (talk) 23:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC) PS2: El_C now thinks that I used - which in fact you used. He just told me that's he is a breath away from "banning" me - for what you did. You see how careful you have to be in the use of language. You should not use any such language! --Ludvikus (talk) 23:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your contiuous personal attacks

Please do not attack other editors, which you did here: User:WikiSkeptic. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AWikiSkeptic&diff=211908332&oldid=211352135

You have been warned for your extreme incivility several times by an admin and other editors including me. This comment was written right after I reverted your just "claim" with no source.[1][2] You insulted me enough. This will be my last time to bear your insult. Be careful and refrain yourself from doing such behaviors.--Appletrees (talk) 17:27, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you? My Page is not directed at you and I certainly don't keep track of your editing history. Nobody's insulted you. I haven't even written on any of your pages in days. Please don't see insults where none are directed to you. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 17:30, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who am I? I'm the one who has been offended several times by your continuous incivility and personal attacks. I provided the diff what you did to me. That could be a coincidence. Okay, I let the admin who warned your wrongdoings to know of this and judge the behaviors. --Appletrees (talk) 17:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd appreciate it if you'd stop Wiki-stalking me. You may find this to be some kind of joke, but I take what you are doing seriously. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 17:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No way, what a unfunny joking you're throwing. Look at the articles that you edited recently. You will see my edit much earlier and the article have been on my watch list for a long time. You also insult me and false accuse me of wikistalking you. I think you've been wikistaling me instead. You left the horrendous personal attacks at the talk of User:Azukimonaka's SSP. You must stop the disruptive behaviors. --Appletrees (talk) 17:41, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but I've been editing East Asian articles since 2004. I certainly don't keep track of your watch list, and have never seen it to my knowledge. This is called paranoia when you think I'm watching what you do as if I actually care. And thank you, we've already estalbished that Jap is not an ethnic slur in every country. The Wikipedia article itself explains that it is used in Japan and other countries as simply an abbreviation. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 17:44, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever you excuse yourself, the records of your incivility and personal attacks do not go away. You've offended many people with your inappropriate comments. Then, you false accuse me of following you and then evade your false accusation and incivility issues to Jap matter. Now you accuse me of being paranoid? What a nice compliment. You know I'm a Korean that's why you brought up Seung-hui Cho the other day in order to offend me more. Your unique way of calling people from Asia "Jap', "Kap", "Cap" which are insultive as well. Don't worry, if your thought would be right, you would not be in any trouble. --Appletrees (talk) 17:56, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Immediately after I warned you about the "lynching" comment, you followed me to Skopje ^{(me → you)}, and to Kabul ^{(me → you)}. How do you explain that? I doubt it's a coincidence, since you made few (if any) other mainspace edits during the time. El_C 22:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

My comment was intended to stop the argument before it got even more out of hand - and also hopefully edit conflict any escalation-in-progress. Administrators will be reviewing both your actions now that this has been brought up, and will determine if any action is necessary. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:01, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block

You've been blocked for 24 hours for repeated personal attacks and racist comments. Please stay civil and don't make personal attacks.-Wafulz (talk) 19:41, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Outrageous, I respect Hersfold's demand that I don't appeal the process directly and meanwhile Appletrees goes hog wild on spurious accusations, and this is the outcome. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 19:42, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have received your message requesting help. You have been blocked, per above, for making racist comments and personal attacks. If you want you block reviewed please use {{unblock|your reason here}}. Though please do not abuse it - it will only escalate the situation. Camaron | Chris (talk) 20:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You were already subject to a warning for the "lynching" comment. Explain to me why I shouldn't extend your block duration to one week? El_C 21:30, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a rhetorical question, incidentally. Irrespectively, I have extended the block duration to 72 hours (at the very least, you are faced with that), in light of the past warning and other problematic activity (see my comment here). El_C 22:10, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spam in Cash America International

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Cash America International, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Cash America International is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Cash America International, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 22:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of List of private capital acquistions in 2007

Proposed deletion of List of private capital acquistions in 2007

The article List of private capital acquistions in 2007 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned partial list of a handful of transactions. This article does not have nearly enough context or substance to be kept

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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. |► ϋrбanяeneωaℓ • TALK ◄| 07:48, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion for Meishi

An article that you have been involved in editing, Meishi, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Syockit (talk) 15:22, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

June 2010

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the article Expo 2010 has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Thank you. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 10:37, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I may be an autodidact...

...but I'm an old one. I taught myself almost everything I know long before Wikipedia existed. Nice try though. ;)

I'd not necessarily say that having written 7% of Wikipedia is a good thing. I'd have to ask which 7%? To completely misquote Stalin (well, who wouldn't) "sometimes quality has a quantity all of its own"...

AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:48, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I find it amusing (and hopefully WikiSkeptic was being tongue-in-cheek in his "percentage") that his own statistics start at 0.4%, then due to his 80/20 page-traffic concept, multiplies by 4x to 1.7%. Perhaps something happened to the "1" and the "." to achieve a magical 7%!

Cheers! — DennisDallas (talk) 07:04, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blackbriar (novel)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Blackbriar (novel), and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://blackbriarinc.net/.

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. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:33, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Spirit House

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of The Spirit House, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.spirithouse.com.au/.

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. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:44, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments on Talk:Cavalese cable car disaster (1998)

I came across your comments on Talk:Cavalese cable car disaster (1998), specifically [3]. Someone editing Wikipedia since 2007 should know that it is never acceptable to call another editor a racial epithet; see WP:NPA. If you continue to make comments such as this, you are liable to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. –Grondemar 08:35, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Popular Hits of the Showa Era: A Novel (Novel)

The article Popular Hits of the Showa Era: A Novel (Novel) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable book

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. —Ryulong (竜龙) 08:27, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Parasite Pig

The article Parasite Pig has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable book, no reliable sources proviced

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. —Ryulong (竜龙) 08:27, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Twilight Years

The article The Twilight Years has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable book with no sources on it

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. —Ryulong (竜龙) 08:28, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Spirit House

The article The Spirit House has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable book

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. —Ryulong (竜龙) 08:28, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Blackbriar (novel)

The article Blackbriar (novel) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable book

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. —Ryulong (竜龙) 08:28, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Cui Tiankai

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 Cui Tiankai 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. —Ryulong (竜龙) 08:29, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of PHH Corporation

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 PHH Corporation 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 an organization or company, 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. —Ryulong (竜龙) 08:31, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you bloody kidding me? PHH has ALREADY been through deletion review. Try writing a few articles first and then bring out the deletion cannon. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 08:32, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see no such information. Just because it's been removed from speedy before does not mean it should be, again. Also, I write plenty of articles that are better than the stuff you've been spewing out.—Ryulong (竜龙) 08:35, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Check the edit history. A vandal destroyed most of the content. Back in proper WP days, we did things like check the edit history before concluding the article was 'too sparse' for inclusion. It's like you're 12 years old. Christ. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 08:37, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stop referring to "proper WP days". Times have changed in the 5 years (one less than I've been here) that you've been a member of this project. Now, pages need proper sourcing. If you can't deal with that, don't write new articles that won't stand a chance with the current guidelines and policies.—Ryulong (竜龙) 08:41, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is something called 'basic WP manners' meaning we don't nominate 12 articles in a row (at a velocity of one article every 30 seconds), without the basic courtesy of an edit history check. PHH existed as a 24 KB article before a vandal deleted it, and based on its current size, you now propose the article be eliminated. THis is childish. I hope for your sake you're recovering from a drug addiction or something, but it woudl be sad if this is your normal, healthy personality. PS I wrote something like 1.7% of WP content read today. In the first years of WP, you would just go to like 'cat' and there would be nothing there. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 08:47, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is not my onus to be required to check anything regarding page history. And your accusations of my personal health are entirely out of the question and completely inappropriate. The article on PHH does not show that it is anyway of any note, as do several of the other articles you authored that I discovered tonight. And you keep saying "Back in the day" when this is the first edit I can find of yours, and I can see edits going back to at least 2002 on some pages. So stop trying to play that I'm the newbie when my first recorded edit outdates yours by 18 months.—Ryulong (竜龙) 08:52, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a nice touch, too. Please, remove it.—Ryulong (竜龙) 09:21, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiskeptic, you are probably right about the article but you should know better than to say what you did (I hope you are not ...) even on your own talk p. No matter how justified you may be, it's never necessary. these days, you could be blocked for it, but I think a more informal warning is appropriate.

As you may be seeing, these days people tend to be very ready to mark for deletion articles that are not immediately sourced. I don't think they should be doing that, but some other admins will actually delete articles on that basis. The only practical way to deal with it is to make sure you always add a good source at the very first edit. If you need some help coping with anyone over-eager to remove articles, I'll be glad to help you adjust to them.

But what I came here to say is that your articles on the Steator novels are not really sufficient, at least not the way things go now. The criteria are at WP:BOOK, and essentially require references to two substantial review articles or other discussions, or evidence of prizes. I removed the deletion tags on the book articles, because I think you will be able to find them. If you cannot, the best thing to do will be to make sections for them in the article on the author and put the material there, rather than just having the bare list as it is at present. I'd advise you to fix this very quickly, before the article gets nominated for deletion by a regular deletion process--it's all too likely to happen. If so, let me know, and I will help defend them--I often work on such articles. Childrens' literature is quite a problem here--people simply delete what they do not recognize from their own childhood. DGG ( talk ) 19:23, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When WP has fewer trainspotting and animu articles and more genuine literature, it shall once again earn my respect. Actually I'm starting to get a bit bored of the project. All the articles have been written... -WikiSkeptic (talk) 07:29, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of PHH Corporation

The article PHH Corporation has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article lacks sources, claims to be a billion dollar company but there appears to be no actual impact of this corporation.

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. —Ryulong (竜龙) 17:33, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Popular Hits of the Showa Era: A Novel for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Popular Hits of the Showa Era: A Novel 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/Popular Hits of the Showa Era: A Novel 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. —Ryulong (竜龙) 17:38, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This website is a joke. Overrun by the animu clan... as opposed to the Arima clan. I shall contribute my 500 obscure works of Finnish and British literature to the project when a 19th century novel with a million readers is considered notable and six thousand shades of the color blue as worn by Pokechu is not. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 07:31, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your user page

Do not add derrogatory comments directed at other editors to your user page, again. You've done this multiple times in the past, and they've been removed from your userpage.—Ryulong (竜龙) 08:05, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Blackbriar (novel) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Blackbriar (novel) 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/Blackbriar (novel) 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. —Ryulong (竜龙) 08:13, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

we haven't become friends because a few weeks have passed. You believe " 5000 pikachu ultra man transform sequences" is a notable article; I will be translating attic Greek pot shards and discussing hilbert spaces next week with a wrangler. When u even understand what I wrote, your education will approach mine. Good life!-WikiSkeptic (talk) 10:00, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not attempting to make friends. I'm trying to clean up after you. Perhaps my "5000 pikachu ultra man transform sequences" have actual reliable sources behind them, unlike your articles. Attic Greek is the language of classical Athens. And it's pot sherds, not pot shards. You've got me on "hilbert spaces" though.—Ryulong (竜龙) 07:04, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For my part, I have a tough time reconciling someone who claims to be a scholar with someone who believes that "u" is a word, but that's just me. Ravenswing 17:12, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI

I have started a discussion concerning you on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.—Ryulong (竜龙) 09:01, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

March 2012

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistent disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Tristessa (talk) 15:36, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 4

Hi. When you recently edited Parasite Pig, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Locus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:30, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 11

Hi. When you recently edited The Genie of Sutton Place, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Young adult (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:26, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 22

Hi. When you recently edited Artificial island, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Housing (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:28, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Airborne gun, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page M198 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:37, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Airborne gun (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Sea Stallion and M77

Spring Airlines (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Tottori

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:01, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Osamu Dazai

Please see Talk:Osamu Dazai re: "brutally honest". Jpatokal (talk) 11:56, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sky of fire

It's not the subject your adding. It's where. The fire balloons, & Indy, are too minor for submarine warfare. Put them on the Pacific War page. The fire balloons, on an unconventional warfare page, or "balloons in war"; IDK where. As placed, they're too far off-topic.
The value of the Type 93 torpedo might make it, but IMO, giving it more than passing mention isn't warranted, because it worked, & the doctrine is what goverend IJN sub failures, not the torpedo; in USN, it wasn't that way.
I'm also curious what source you were using for the initial claim IJN boats were better, & how you misread it. (I can't resist a good source.) TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 02:36, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Houbei class missile boat, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page C4 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:05, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Allegiance (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bow Wow (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Junichi Saga, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Love and Theft (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 01:02, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Centralia mine fire

Regarding your comment at Talk:Centralia mine fire; I wanted to let you know there's anow a centralized RfC discussion on it at Talk:Centralia, Pennsylvania#RfC: should information about the fire be in its own article or remain here? While I disagree with your position, I did want to point you towards the RfC. That way, all views can be expressed at the RfC so that there can be a healthy discussion on it. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:38, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

nice, thanks=-WikiSkeptic (talk) 15:39, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

April 2013

Your recent editing history at Turkey shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you 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. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 03:08, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did to Turkey. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Don't use edit-summaries to attack other editors. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 03:10, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy notice for ANI

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 04:33, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for attempting to drive off editors by ridiculous national/race arguments - contrary to community nature of the project. 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 below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 15:28, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well that is bullshit of course. I already served the time for that and I personally reverted the edits. Now you are allowing any spastic OCD editor to bring up things that happened five years ago and cite it for a further block because they disagree with the NPOV efforts on that and a number of other issues. All you are doing is encouraging editors to mass spam WP rather than build a long record since they will continually have past history aired on closed matters that have already had 'time served.' Good luck fucker. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 06:24, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So your response is to refer to editors as "spastic" and "OCD" ... and this is somehow not a personal attack of some sort? Great way to show that you're not going to repeat the behaviours that led to this block, as per WP:GAB. I have extended this block to indefinite, and removed your ability to further attack editors (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:46, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing your talkpage due to abuse of the unblock process. You may still contest any current block by using the unblock ticket request system, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

(✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:49, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Super Brand Mall

The article Super Brand Mall has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no independent reference

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Andrewjenner75 (talk) 04:09, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]