Archives

PISS OFF, Geniac

This is my opinion. If it is deleted from my talk page, I will be making the biggest ass out of you that is physically possible to do. And that's a promise...

And remember kids, this asshole is known in multiple countries for being a complete jerkwad to people who act like asswad material from the inevitable abyss. -- Xidoraven (talk) 18:35, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No personal attacks

With regard to your comments on User talk:Xidoraven: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --Geniac (talk) 00:23, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Krewe of Harpocrates

A tag has been placed on Krewe of Harpocrates requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, 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. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, 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 article's 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 confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. --Geniac (talk) 00:26, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ask me why I love Wikipedia, and why no college considers it verifiable or credible

I promise you'll like the answer....

Have you ever tried to post an article, whether backed by references or not, to this site? It's not easy, kids. Nor is it very easy to deal with the so-called self-appointed administrators, nor is there a veritable or tolerant process of appeals. Why is this? Well, mostly because if the topic you are posting about is not on the administrators' plates or interest, you can pretty much expect that it will not be posted. Furthermore, like a truly fascist nation of Earth, your posting may (and probably will be - such as the case will likely be with this posting) be deleted permanently, with a very difficult process of trying to redeem and transfer that information.

My example? User_talk:Sandstein#Exopolitics

Highly amusing. Yes, I like my soap box. Wikipedia talk pages are exactly for that, talking. I wonder if the response to this posting will be a response, or simply a deletion of something that another person feels is not credible, important, or verifiable. I promise you that this posting is all three. Look around and see the deception around you. It's everywhere; even here. -- 72.207.232.146 (talk) 20:33, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]