User talk:Kuyabribri/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Rick Berman Article

What is your problem with the Rick Berman edits? Half the page is cited references to opinion regarding his performance with Star Trek. This is an article based on a living person and should conform to the biography standards, be neutral, and not a place to report opinions and rumor. The article is barely substantial at all for a biography and is really questionable with its present content to be qualify at all as one. I would like to insert some tags that would show that it is in dire need of editing and content. --98.208.209.78 (talk) 17:38, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I redacted the last comment I left on Talk:Rick Berman because it came at roughly the same time as your last deletion of the "Controversy" section. On the whole I don't like en masse deletion of text without an explanation in the edit summary, but I should have inserted in my edit summary the phrase "no prejudice to re-deletion if justified in edit summary," as I typically do when I revert unexplained large deletions. I still believe that an edit summary on the lines of "see talk" would have been sufficient for me to pass on reverting your deletion. I took a better look at the Berman article after you deleted the "Controversy" and I believe that inserting tags is a good idea. I also think it should be moved from High Importance to Top Importance on WP Star Trek. KuyaBriBri^Talk 17:47, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. I appreciate your watchfulness of the Wiki and I really do need to signup for an account. I think I'll do that now. That way my edits are less worrisome. Cheers and was nice to work with you. --98.208.209.78 (talk) 00:19, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Alright I made the account. I will be posting a note on my talk page that I was 98.208.209.78 for a short time, just to be clear. That IP address probably won't last, so I will qualify it with a date and the articles of interest. Cheers. --Lightbound (talk) 00:26, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

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

JCutter (talk) 14:54, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Piedmont High School (California)

Sorry to be editing in such a bad place, but I am not too familiar with the system. I am definitely interested in the Piedmont High School page and look forward to working with you to fix it so that everyone is happy. Thanks. I could appreciate any help you can give. Akhamenehpour (talk) 18:20, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Requesting feedback

It's good that you didn't blindly and repetitively revert. I also noticed that you made use of the talk page, which shows good judgment and maturity. Overall I think you handled the dispute quite well. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:34, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Thankyou

Hi, I recently created the article Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council (where it now resides!). I just wanted to say thanks for moving it to where it should be- I'm fairly new to editing and creation on wikipedia so I was unsure of how to do it. Any other help you can offer on article writing would be greatly appreciated (feel free to use my talk page or the article's). PS, the article has been in existence for less than an hour- how did you find it so quickly? Thanks again, HJ Mitchell (talk) 20:59, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm part of what's called the recent changes patrol. On the left side of the screen, below the search box (if you're using the default skin), there is a link called "Recent changes." Clicking on this link will show the last 50 or so changes made on all of the English Wikipedia.

Anyways, I'm glad to have helped, and I'll continue to monitor this article for grammar, wikifying, categorising, and watching for vandalism. KuyaBriBri^Talk 21:05, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Seriously...

Do you really have nothing better to do than try to get stuff deleted from Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakeyw21 (talk • contribs) 16:36, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Note: This was in reference to my speedy deletion nomination of Pulling a kyle.

Seriously...do you really have nothing better to do than add stupid, unencyclopedic junk to Wikipedia? KuyaBriBri^Talk 16:41, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Parakeet day

Sorry, I deleted it as an obvious hoax under category g3. I should have removed the "expired prod" reason. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 21:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

AfD Fix

Thanks for fixing AfD for me it seems Twinkle is not working properly. BigDunc^Talk 14:32, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Atoy Wilson

Good work! Lou Sander (talk) 14:08, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

hi

thankyou for turning yourself in. It saved me a lot of trouble--Spongefrog (talk) 20:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

TimeOut Hut

If I am in violation of a policy, please explain. If so, how do I delete my post?

I patterned it after many many other posts for sports bars and clubs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dunringil (talk • contribs) 15:28, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

The first thing is the article must meet notability guidelines for inclusion. See WP:COMPANY for guidelines in this specific case. Second, the article read like an advertisement, a violation of Wikipedia:Spam. If you believe you patterned your article after articles on other sports bars and/or clubs that are included in Wikipedia, let me know which ones and I'll take a look. Your article has already been deleted but you may ask for it to be posted to your userspace (a process called "userfication") by contacting the administrator who deleted it, Cobaltbluetony, on his talk page. KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:40, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Imposter

Thanks for the alert. I have never created doppleganger accounts, nor to I intend to in the near future. That user has been reported. Thanks. Arbiteroftruth ^{Plead Your Case} 19:36, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, after what you said, I decided to create two doppelganger accounts. Abbiter ofthetruth and Abiteroftruth are both my doppelganger accounts. Thanks for looking out for me! Arbiteroftruth ^{Plead Your Case} 20:09, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Good thing I checked my talk page before saving the message I was typing out for the admin who protected that account! Happy editing. KuyaBriBri^Talk 20:15, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Deleted comments

I have deleted 3 comments regarding my reversion of vandalism on rock climbing articles. All further comments on this subject will be reported as socks and deleted. KuyaBriBri^Talk 22:30, 9 April 2009 (UTC) 22:31, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Goans in Field Hockey

Hi I just came across an posted article on 'Goans in Field Hockey'. My name was listed as a former Canadian Field Hockey player, but the article appears to be deleted. I am interested in getting a copy of the article that was deleted........and yes, I did play for Canada.

I am unfamiliar with the rules but I am interested in ascertaining how administrators would delete an article without validating the authenticity of posted articles. Pdesouza (talk) 01:14, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure how long deleted articles are still accessible, but you may contact user MBisanz (talk · contribs) – the administrator who deleted it – and ask him/her if it's still available to userfy, i.e., place it into your userspace.

For Wikipedia's policy on deletion of articles, see Wikipedia:Deletion policy and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. For the specific discussion that led to this article's deletion, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter De Souza. This particular discussion went on for 8 days, longer than the typical 5 days that an Articles for Deletion discussion takes, and was prominently linked from the Peter De Souza page the entire time. If you believe the deletion was unjustified, please contact MBisanz first as the deleting admin, and if you are not satisfied with the response you get, please see Wikipedia:Deletion review. KuyaBriBri^Talk 05:01, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Moving pages

I'm not sure you handled things correctly when you tried to move John P. Healey from Jimpeoples's userspace. I think you may have just copied and pasted, which breaks GFDL since it doesn't show all the edits that took place for that article (the edits done in his userspace). Next time, move the article by clicking the "move" tab. Also, I noticed you've been calling the mainspace the "Wikipedia space". That's technically not right, as there is a Wikipedia namespace that is not the same. Just letting you know :-) Killiondude (talk) 06:26, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I see where you believe I referred to the main space (which I typically refer to as the "article space") as the "Wikipedia space" ([1]). My intent was to type that message in a tone appropriate for a newbie who isn't familiar with Wiki-speak. I know the difference between the two and in fact originally moved this article from the WP space to Jimpeoples' userspace when he improperly created it (newbie mistake). Perhaps I should have worded it as "Wikipedia's main space."

As for the Healey article, I transcluded it from his userspace into the article space. Knowing that I would show in the page history as the "creator" of the article, I left a message on the talk page shortly after, crediting Jimpeoples with origination of the article. If moving is the way to go in this case, I'll make a note of it but will ask some folks and see what is the proper Wikiquette. KuyaBriBri^Talk 13:00, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, you don't transclude pages to move them. You just click the move tab at the top of the page that needs to be moved, and then follow the instructions there. Its not just that we need to know who originally wrote articles, but edit histories must remain intact for it to follow GFDL standards. Just letting you know :-) Oh, and you don't need to give me talkback templates, I've had your talk page watchlisted (I do that when I post on other's talk pages). Killiondude (talk) 22:30, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Language Proficiency Index

You are so smug with you "Go ahead and report me"

I know what I am writing about and it is accurate information.

There are no research papers about the LPI to refer to.

I do not even know how to commicate with you to find out why you did what you did.

If you think I am "promoting" it because there was something about being too positive (or whatever) in one note that I saw.

You are more like Big Brother who is laughing because I am in a system I do not understand called Wikipedia and you can control what I do.

This is not a fair way to deal with me.

Did you read the sections about the problems? Do you think I would write that if I was promoting something.

There are good things one can say about Wikipedia and saying that it has integrity (I am not so sure, given you haughty and high-handed treatment of me) is not promoting it.

One the other hand if the longest part of the page is pointing out serious problems with Wikipedia, that is a pretty stupid way of "promoting" it.

This is a joke to you, but I have spend many hours writing what I did and editing it carefully.

Nothing I have written is inaccurate...including what is wrong with this test.

You act like The Government to me, not an independent moderator looking for the truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lpi-english (talk • contribs) 15:08, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Please refer to the following Wikipedia core content policies:

• Wikipedia:Verifiability – the lead of this policy states, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth" (original emphasis). EVERYTHING you posted to the article was uncited, let alone from reliable sources.
• Wikipedia:No original research – judging from your post above, everything you posted to the article falls into this category.
• Wikipedia:Neutral point of view

Additionally, I left messages on the article talk page ([2]) and your user talk page ([3]) trying to initiate a discussion and avoid an edit war. You didn't respond until after two other editors reverted the same content unbeknownst to me, and I notified you that I had reported you for edit warring.

KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:34, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

It says you left me a message but I do not know how to access it.

I have registered a complaint with "abuse" but I am not sure it was done correctly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lpi-english (talk • contribs) 15:43, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I also want you to unblock my ap address so that I can copy what I have written as it took me many!!! hours.

I will not revert back except to do this because you are acting like a bully, and will just block me again.

There were more hours put into that than I care to think. I made about 150 edits. It was an honest page.

It was both correct I want to copy in text form of what I have written and find a forum that is open to let the students at UBC who are BLIND about this test know what is happening.

I wrote it.

I have a write to access it, if only to have a copy for myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lpi-english (talk • contribs) 15:48, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I didn't respond to your so-called edit wars because what I wrote had been vandalized.

What I wrote was unbiased and truthful.

There are no articles to cite. There has been no research on the LPI.

Did you read the crticisms I wrote...as well as the truthful positive things? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lpi-english (talk • contribs) 15:52, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

It says you have left me messages, but I do not see them or know how to access them.

WOW!! Wikipedia will never be the same! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lpi-english (talk • contribs) 15:58, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Responding to your comments in the order you posted them:

1. The first tag that says I left you a message refers to my post above (the one that begins "Please refer to…") You should have received a second, identical tag, which refers to this post.
2. Please read the top of my talk page. You truly believe I have engaged in some misconduct, have left me messages indicating so, and are unsatisfied with my response. So please bring this up at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. I mean this in a non-mocking, non-condescending manner.
3. The top of my talk page also says, "I AM NOT a Wikipedia administrator" (original emphasis), which means I cannot block or unblock your IP address or username. What I have done is report you to those who do have the authority to do so.
4. Your text is not lost, and may be accessed from the page history. For your convenience, you may access the last version before my first reversion by clicking here.
5. Again, one of Wikipedia's core content policies is "verifiability, not truth." It doesn't matter whether the content you added is true or not – if it can't be verified from reliable sources, it should not be included in Wikipedia. I do think you have a valid message, but I think the best way to spread it is through a forum or blog, or an op-ed piece in Vancouver-area newspapers or UBC campus publications. KuyaBriBri^Talk 16:15, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I cannot deal with this now. I have to go out.

What I wrote is mine if Wikipedia is not going to allow it. I want a copy.

I see that I can now revert it back and I want to do this because I want to copy the page and paste it in a WORD document.

I do not plan to do this because you are a bully with power.

However, I would like to do this with Wikipedia's knowledge.

There is nothing VERIFYABLE about the LPI and a million things I have read on Wikipedia.

People talk about things they understand, and if you look at so many Wiki pages a great deal CANNOT be verified.

I wrote that with integity. When I wrote that the LPI marking system is not tranparent making it difficult for both students and teachers to understand the way it works, I did not reveal the actual way in which the LPI is marked (I know) out of respect for the test. Yes, they are a bit secretive. And no, I decided, unless they University decides to tell the whole story, I will not break their confidence.

Read some Wikipedia pages and you will see an astounding amount of information that cannot be cited. Block them all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lpi-english (talk • contribs) 16:16, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I have copied the page but I do not have time to look at it. Please leave the link open.

I wish to deal with this with an administrator, but I am too busy to argue my case for hours.

I hope someone will contact me in a way that I can talk with them. —Preceding unsigned comment added

by Lpi-english (talk • contribs) 16:20, 10 April 2009 (UTC) 

Your editing on my page

You seem to have edited/vandalised my Talk page so it is gibberish.

The edit I made to Adam Walker involved an editing of out of copyright material. It was not ikn copyright

Johnbibby (talk) 15:18, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I viewed your talk page using both Mozilla Firefox and Microsoft Internet Explorer and do not see anything that indicates that my edit to your talk page caused it to become gibberish.

As to the subject at hand, the document claims the following copyright:

© Stirling Astronomical Society

Prior permission is required to reprint or otherwise use any material from Mercury.

Wikipedia:C#UK Copyright clearly states:

Crown copyright protection in published material lasts for fifty years from the end of the year in which the material was first published. Therefore material published [fifty-one years ago], and any Crown copyright material published before that date, would now be out of copyright, and may be freely reproduced throughout the world.

If you have permission to reproduce this material, I suggest you send documentation attesting to this in an email to the Wikimedia Foundation at info@wikimedia.org. KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:34, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

RE Discussion at WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Recurring edit war on articles related to Piedmont, California

Thanks for the notice, I'll see how the discussion turns before posting though. WHSL ^(Talk) 06:44, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Supposed Vandalism

This is not vandalism, I am trying to expand your list of racial slurs. The list does not contain the slurs "spear chucker" "zip/zippo/zipperhead" or target. This is not vandalism because the page is locked and I am suggesting that they be added. IKnowMeSomeSlurs (talk) 21:04, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I jumped the gun on reverting your initial contribution. For some reason I did not see that the edit was to the talk page and not the article page. I'm moving on but just note that your username is going to prevent other users from taking your contributions seriously. KuyaBriBri^Talk 21:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Maybe you people shouldn't be so ignorant, and you should accept everybody for who and what they are. IKnowMeSomeSlurs (talk) 21:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the comment on my talk page and for the report Maen. K. A. (talk) 22:10, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you again, really funny user lol Maen. K. A. (talk) 13:15, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Please help with moving 2009 Tea Party Protests back

Howdy Kuya! I've been monitoring the Tea Party protests for a little while now and there have been some changes made that seem to be borderline. Namely, they renamed the page - a contribution originally made by you which I thought was more accurate. Any help? Thoughts?--Happysomeone (talk) 18:00, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

I only moved it to 2009 Tea Party protests from 2009 "tea party" protests because the title with quotation marks reeked of POV. Non-administrators such as myself cannot move a page if the page it is being moved to already exists. That action can only be done by an administrator. Judging from the move history, I would not suggest moving the article without further discussion on that talk page. I would suggest listing at WP:RM but the article talk page seems to get enough traffic that listing at RM may be overkill. KuyaBriBri^Talk 18:36, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

CSD Review

Per your request, I'm doing a quick CSD review, note for the most part I will be pointing out problems/concerns that I have. I will then provide an overall summary. Pay more attention to the overall summary/impression of your work. Eg it is possible that I may list a number of "items" but 10 items doesn't mean too much if I review 1000 edits. On the other hand 10 "items" may mean more if I only looked at 20 edits. I write my comments as they come, thus I may say something, then reverse it based upon new information. Here we go:

1) I just looked at an article you tagged as G1. The article basically composed of a link to a page an a person saying go look at it. I'm not sure why you tagged it G1. A1/A3 would have been better (I always get those two backwards). Take a look at wp:nonsense. Nonsense does not mean that it is too unbelievable to be believed, but rather that it is literally nonsense/garbage and you can't make heads or tail of it. The page was deleted G11.

2) An article about a soccer player made a claim of importance/significance when it declared the soccer player to be “Italy’s next Francesco Totti”. This would be enough of a claim to protect it from an A7 deletion. The article was deleted G4 as it had already undergone an AFD.

3) You nomed an article on "Naugle" as G1. It was clearly a word that was made up, as it supposedly means to "surf the web." But it is not a G1 candidate. While it may be nonsense in vernacular use of the term nonsense, it is not nonsense per the definition of G1.

4)There was an article about a military reservist, that included the line "Is a butt pirate and enjoys pink socking his wife." You tagged it as G3. But it would be better tagged as G10---vandalism, when it relates to people, is likely G10 unless it is about oneself. As such, make sure you blank the page. You want to remove personal attacks before a wikiclone captures it or Google indexes the attack page.

5) Again, how is "Arse cakes" slang term for Scones in the uk G1? It may be vandalism and a garbage article, but I can makes sense of the article. You might want to review WP:FIELD, WP:10CSD, and WP:WIHSD

6) Good job on catching the Willy on Wheels vandal...

7)There was an article on a Christian networking site. You nomed it A7, but A7 would not be appropriate because the entire article was about how the site was unique and filled a niche. The article was deleted as blatant advertising, which is correct.

These edits were in the past 10 days. You really need to watch what you are tagging with G1. G1 is one of the first things I look at and when I see "G1 abuse" it sends alarm bells. That being said, the fact that you asked me to review your work tells me that you have your heart in the right place and want to do it right.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 05:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

1995 American League West tie-breaker game

My apologies for the late message, my internet connection conked out. Anyway, I have placed the article on hold, view the talkpage for details. Thanks, and good luck! CarpetCrawler^{message me} 22:57, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, the article has passed! View the talkpage for details. Great job! :) CarpetCrawler^{message me} 04:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion

Kuyabribri, Gaia Octavia Agrippa has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk | _Sign 20:16, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

The Double (Seattle Mariners)

I have begun a GA review of this article. As the nominator, I felt you should know. Go M's. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 22:09, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Are you planning further revisions to the article? I don't want to make my assessment prematurely. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 23:23, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Let me know when you're ready for my assessment. The article doesn't seem wanting for much right now. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 03:24, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't see your last message due to the one below coming up first when I opened my talk page. I need to add one more statement on Edgar Martinez' legacy and possibly an image of the Kingdome and I'll be ready. KuyaBriBri^Talk 13:27, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

K. I'll get to it later tonight/early tomorrow morning, whichever it actually winds up being. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 23:15, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Problem: The link to the Niehaus call is dead. This needs to be fixed (all the other links work). You don't necessarily need to link to the call itself, but a transcription would be good. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 04:23, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Done. KuyaBriBri^Talk 13:41, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

RfA Thank You

My RFA passed today at 75/2/1 so I wanted to thank you for your participation in it. Special thanks go to GlassCobra and FlyingToaster for their nomination and support. Cheers! --Rosiestep (talk) 01:48, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Thank you for participating in my recent RfA, which was unable pass with a final tally of (45/39/9). I plan on addressing the concerns raised and working to improve in the next several months. Hopefully, if/when I have another RfA I will win your support. Special thanks go to MBisanz, GT5162, and MC10 for nominating me. Thanks again, -download ׀ sign! 01:28, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Automatic processing of your editor review

This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 18 May 2009 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding <!--noautoarchive--> to the review page will prevent further automated actions. End of line. DustyBot (talk) 14:00, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Shameless thankspam

FlyingToaster Barnstar

Hello Kuyabribri! Thank you so much for your support in my recent RfA, which passed with a tally of 126/32/5. I am truly humbled by the trust you placed in me, and will endeavor to live up to that trust. FlyingToaster

about GlobalPEACE

Ok... i will attempt make the relevant editing and references changes to improve the article to explain the concept/Norwest2 (talk) 14:10, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Can't Stop Feeling

An article that you have been involved in editing, Can't Stop Feeling, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Can't Stop Feeling. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 15:16, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Uniforms

Hey, thanks for clearing that up for me. I suppose that if I'd watched from the beginning, I would have known what was going on.InspectorSands (talk) 18:28, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Home birth

Thank you for your assistance on the home birth page. We have been struggling with vandalism for some considerable time from that one editor. The area is contentious, we know and several of us have been doing our best to improve the article, but the anon editor keeps running"interference" on the article and driving us nuts. Thank you again. Gillyweed (talk) 22:44, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Ditto what he said. Since I've been labeled "POV" I hesitate to revert this anon editor's reverts, but the article is currently stalled as a result. Lcwilsie (talk) 17:31, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Apology

I'd like to apologise for my use of the "Minor Change" button. Thank you for explaining what I was doing and it won't happen again. Lalbe4 (talk) 07:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution Process

Hello, Kuyabribri. I've noticed that you have taken a step in the Dispute Resolution Process by posting in WQA. Please note that it is recommended that you advise the other party of your complaint filing so that they are aware of it, and so that they have a chance to respond.

If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:35, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Marco Bolognesi

Hey, thanks for closing that AfD--please don't forget to remove the AfD template from the article. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 20:11, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder - it's been a while since I NAC'd an AfD that wasn't deleted or redirected. KuyaBriBri^Talk 20:56, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Ha, at least you know how to do it--you're at least one up on me. Drmies (talk) 21:23, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Meg soper

Lol, that is exactly what happened. Ill leave it alone so we dont step on each others toes again. ;-) Bonewah (talk) 15:26, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

wow the page is not even finished

let me finish my page before you request a speedy deletion —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alec more fan (talk • contribs) 12 June 2009

I am not good at deletion proposals

Thank you for fixing the problem. Could you tell me what I did wrong on step two? --Amadscientist (talk) 19:12, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

The process is described in detail at WP:AFDHOWTO. You forgot to add the following when you started the deletion discussion page:

• {{subst:afd2 | pg=PageName | cat=Category | text=Reason the page should be deleted}} ~~~~

KuyaBriBri^Talk 19:20, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you.--Amadscientist (talk) 19:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Reporting my account to administrators

Hi. I notice you've just reported my account to Wikipedia administrators. Can I ask why? All I'm doing is adding relevant, contextual links to content from our magazine's website, among other contributions, to different topics. I don't see this as spam.

Thanks Simon Ward, Wanderlust Magazine —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wanderlust magazine (talk • contribs) 16:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

As the notice I left on your talk page stated, your username is in violation of the Wikipedia username policy. KuyaBriBri^Talk 16:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Very nice of you.

I offer commendations for undertaking a massive cleanup job on the cemetary article. You are a faiar brare person then I. Good LuckHell in a Bucket (talk) 16:38, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I started an ANI thread over the Copyright Vios. If you feel like you want to comment it's on the board. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 13:34, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Why are you trying to delete my page

I just got started, why won't people just let me finish Lil Ant (music artist) (talk) 20:56, 19 June 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lil Ant (music artist) (talk • contribs) 20:43, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Greek Love AHD nomination withdrawn

Guidlines said that if the article was meeting disputes the nominination could be withdrawn and administrators would clode the AFD discussion. I wasn't sure if that was something that poped up automaticaly on a list somewhere to notify Admin so I thought I would let you know. I lined out my original statement and added "Nomination withdrawn" at the top.--Amadscientist (talk) 17:35, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I looked for details on intructions for withdrawing the nomination and only found that the nomination could be withdrawn but was not sure what I needed to do.....of course the words "Admin only" was a hint, but I wasn't sure if that was specificaly while there was an active nom in place.--Amadscientist (talk) 17:50, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Cemetery of the Holy Rood

On June 22, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cemetery of the Holy Rood, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Royalbroil 14:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Posted by AzureReds (talk · contribs)

I Re-constituted the post you removed in hopes that it would better adhere to Wikipedia's EULA. I do hope you are satisfied with my changes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AzureReds (talk • contribs) 22:12, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

It would seem that my efforts to be respectful or your EULA did not please you. My 2nd post was not excessively slander-full in any way and tastefully addressed concerns without excessive slander or curse's. As this is a site to share information I dso believe i should be able to post my material.

I will edit my entry one last time and remove any curse words in hopes that this will satiate you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AzureReds (talk • contribs) 22:20, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Above user's contributions are blatant vandalism and has been indefinitely blocked as such. KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Odd Man Out: A Year on the Mound with a Minor League Misfit

On June 28, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Odd Man Out: A Year on the Mound with a Minor League Misfit, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wizardman 02:35, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Posted by GenRescue (talk · contribs)

your edits to the Generation Rescue page are misrepresenting a non-profit organization and you have posted false information. please stop editing the Generation Rescue page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GenRescue (talk • contribs) 20:48, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Please read the third bullet in the red box at the top of this page. KuyaBriBri^Talk 21:18, 6 July 2009 (UTC)