Iamthedoctor2009

Talk page - feel free to discuss here.

Speedy deletion nomination of Doctor Who Online/Subpage

A tag has been placed on Doctor Who Online/Subpage 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 web content, 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web 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 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 page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 16:21, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Iamthedoctor2009. You have new messages at Ttonyb1's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

In order to give you time to bring the article up to the notability standards for web pages, I have userfied the article to User:Iamthedoctor2009/Doctor Who Online. Once you have made sure that the article meets the notability requirements, please make another un-protection request at WP:RFPP. Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 18:01, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Nomination of Jedward: Let Loose for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article Jedward: Let Loose, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jedward: Let Loose until a concensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 16:14, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Downton Abbey

Fantastic program! love it loads too! As i said previously i would love to see a second series! have a look at this place...(Bank Hall) this is my dream of Downton Abbey! :) Bankhallbretherton (talk) 22:17, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Hey, Bank Hall looks great (have they finished the restoration?), very Downton Abbey! Iamthedoctor2009 (talk) 17:19, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Silent Witness

I shouldn't really revert any more on Silent Witness, but could you check out the link I left on the talkpage. I'll also try to find the BBC episode guide I saw for next week which features Harry investigating something.--BelovedFreak 23:17, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

same website. Would you consider reverting yourself?--BelovedFreak 23:18, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

July 2011

Your addition to Trollied has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Premise section copied word-for word from http://sky1.sky.com/trollied-about-the-show and episode summaries copied word-for word from: http://www.comedy.co.uk/guide/tv/trollied/episodes/ Logical Fuzz (talk) 19:04, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Whilst I understand why you have taken such action, I would say there were frankly obvious alterations made to the 'Premise' text and it was not simply a cut and paste job. I do accept the episode descriptions were word-for-word copies, which I believe is commonplace on many Wikipedia articles, however I understand that does not make such behaviour acceptable and I will be more careful in the future. May I also take this opportunity to suggest a more friendly approach; 'persistent violators will be blocked from editing' will only provoke bad feelings. Iamthedoctor2009 (talk) 21:13, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC)