Why are all my articles being deleted, even ones I only edited, and why are all you users making so many inaccurate assumptions about my articles? I am brand new to wikipedia, and you have sucked all the motivation and enthusiasm from me. I didn't realize when I added Garbasail (an article I DID NOT create) to the "Sailing" category, that it would lead to you gathering your troops, and wiping me off this site completely. How can I possibly defend myself, not even understanding the process? How can I defend myself to multiple experienced users who have already made their extremely closed minds up? I don't know why you chose me to pick on, but you have succeeded, and it is unfair. I would add to the discussion if I could find any discussion. When users say merely "Vanity", "Original Research", or "Complete Bollocks", I can not sense any discussion. I also did not realize that the number of hits on google can make a definition credible, it seems to me like this is a VERY flawed system. I will likely just give up, because I don't have an army like you. Thanks for giving me the equivalent of a punch in the stomach. I apologize if I come across at all argumentative, it is not my intention, I am just seriously offended by the organized effort to attack my articles directly. - Ronsonmanchild 12:42, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
You're an Admin, right? Even if not, maybe you can help with this. On the page noted in the heading, I got into a tussle with this one guy who kept posting a website that is essentially an ad for a documentary film that his brother made, about the 1979 Greensboro incident. I kept reverting it as spam, and he kept re-reverting it on the grounds that it has free clips on it. I think he was sufficiently chastened, but I advised him to find an Admin because I could be wrong about this. Wahkeenah 00:01, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
I advised this user what you advised that he do, i.e. to plead his case to the wiki community, which it looks like he has not done. He complained about some other items on that page being spam, and I advised him if he thought they were spam, he was free to delete those as well. At this point I have lost interest in the discussion. Wahkeenah 14:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
THE FPA is a small organisation started in staffordshire england to campaign for rights for people of larger stature and to make them feel better about themselves i believe we are more propductive than the family planning accosiation! —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Big C ( talk • contribs)
I respect your views on this subject, however i feel that all organisations must start somewhere and I believe that one day the the FPA will become a world renowed organisation. I do accept that that time isnt now and the current membership is only in the region of 80 members but across staffordshire but we are growing considerably and appeared briefely in a local newspaper. What is the threshold for the number of members for us to allow the posting of our information page? The Big C 16:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your continuing work on the Vandalism Patrol. Rossami (talk) 23:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
...for the advice, the information, and for being nice. I did not know about the workspace, and I will not stress about any timeline. - Ronsonmanchild 17:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Just letting you know that the creator of Dimitri Spanoa contested your prod, and I have now taken it to AfD. You can find the debate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dimitri Spanoa. Thanks! Mango juice talk 20:10, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Do you know what you did...you removed other peoples posts as well...do you consider The Moth band as vanity? and what is vain about having a link connected to someone that wants to feature a moth of the week on their site...you are making a poor example of what a WIKI gnome or troll should conduct themeselves as. Instead this is nothing more than harrasment.
I'm not vandalising or testing. I just posted a delete message on an IP talk page, forgetting to log out first. Thanks. — NathanHP ( T • C • W) 00:37, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi.. I'm not sure, I think the article itself was created purely with the intent of promoting Dimitri Spamoa. But as you mentioned "urban art" does return resonable results on search engines, perhaps it just needs a complete re-work? - Deathrocker 13:55, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
I blanked my user page, mostly because I wanted to change it around. But never got to it. IT's not a big deal if you delete the Melody Science article, I don't care if nobody believes...but it is true. Merge87
How do I do what you're talking about? How do I "take something to AfD"? JByrd 02:12, 24 May 2006 (UTC) Help! I'm not sure I formatted it right... JByrd 02:46, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
I see that you have deleted the article about icelandology. I have been out of my office so I see the change just now. The term icelandology is the translation for the Polish term islandologia which was used first time by my colegues from Polish scientific institute which provide studies and website about Iceland. It is not only "tourism website" as you wrote. It is website with scientific articles about culture, politics, natural sciences etc. so the term "icelandology" is a good neologism for such activity. Because we use this term to describe our scientific activity, it is occurence for such term in the whole internet. I know that this term is not popular now, but the meaning of this word is clear and I think it will be used more often in future like sinology and egiptology.
Every day scientists create new words for new sciences, new chemical compounds, new stars etc., so I think that it justifies creation of the neologism and the article in Wikipedia. If you think that this article exists only for promoting purposes you may delete the link for www.iceland.pl. TomaszHolband( 83.18.95.146 23:04, 24 May 2006 (UTC))
Lee Hoiby was just the beginning of an article I'd hoped others would add to. I just felt it was odd an unrelated movie would come up for "A Month in the Country", and not him.
I hope there is no cause for copyright infringement at this point - should it only be a stub now?
PietVA 19:07, 5 June 2006
Stop deleting my homie Hooplah!'s articles. Those are true stories. He's been through way more than you know. Don't call it nonsense either. Those are all religous traditions from his homeland in eastern Europe that you called nonsense. If he wasn't such a nice guy, he could get you sued for that ( not that I'm threatening you or anything, I'm a nice guy too). Just stop ratting on him, ok? -- Deathslayer 03:23, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
If you have time, could you keep an eye on the Rush (band) page? 72.82.111.188 seems to be going nuts with vandal edits. I can revert them, but cannot block. Rsm99833 23:56, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
What do we need to do to block him? He posts some variation of the spam and since I started patrolling earlier today, (about an hour, off and on) he has posted at 7 or 8 variations of the same thing. Cheers V. Joe 20:17, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Hey if your watching THISISME, could you help me check over some of his/her older edits? When people make things that look like potential vandalism, I tend to check over older actions by said users. In this case, they've moved around what the chart positions for numerous artists/songs are in various articles, while leaving the old numbers in other locations alone, and I can't verify half of it. Kevin_b_er 00:13, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
This brings up a question: What is the policy on the inclusion of articles on schools? -- Koffieyahoo 02:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I haven't given one of these out in a very, very long time. I hope you will give me the honor of recognizing your long term contributions to Wikipedia today. Your quality edits keep going and going, and so I thought this tireless contributor barnstar would be a suitable one for you. To say the least, you're a wonderful, wonderful Wikipedian, and I treasure your friendship very much. Thank you so much! -- HappyCamper 05:01, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure where to go with this as I'm mainly over on now, but would you mind taking a look at User:Willothewisp? The user appears to have recorded spoken articles in stupid voices deliberately, and I'm not sure how to deal with it. Archer7 22:20, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Please, take it and spread it widely. -- GWO
Hi Joyous! I noticed that you warned User:Yusufdaud about vandalising [1]. Can I ask if you could possible supply the difference for the vandalising that he has done? I belive that, in real life in my class, that this is a person I know and has actually told me he will "bring Wikipedia down," to quote (his name is Yusuf; as the use account name would suggest). I, of course, checked his contributions but it appears that he has not made any so I am asking you, if you can, recall what he has done? If you cannot remember, that's fine. Thank you. K ilo-Lima| (talk) 13:24, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions! + + Lar: t/ c 12:25, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
You know those thingys that prevent non-registered users form vandalising pages. Well am I allowed to put one on FIFA World Rankings as it is constantly vandalised, and its getting tiresome, as there are about 3 of us who revert it, but often section-specific blanking goes un-noticed, and then decent contributions are made, so you cant just roll-back, and its all very tiresome getting the article back to a decnt state. So basically am I allowed to put them up? if so could you guide me through it, if not, could you do it for me? Cheers. Philc T E C I 18:01, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
LEAVE MY PAGE ALONE YOU FAGGOT OR ILL BLANK YOUR PAGE LOL -- Ringoria 22:24, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Just to let you know I found a nothanks template on User:Texas am's user page that you had placed and relocated it to his talk page (and substituted it) which I'm sure it what you intended (I do the same thing ocassionally). Cheers.-- Fuhghettaboutit 21:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
This tool found four more articles with the same site that you removed from Geocaching and I cleaned them up. Apart from the replication lag, it's a useful tool. -- GraemeL (talk) 16:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Good eye on the Children's Literature page where you removed a link on create-your-own books for kids. -- SafeLibraries 06:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Frank Morano. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. -- Deathphoenix ʕ 18:42, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for the barnstar! It wasn't expected but certainly is appreciated. I notice that you are also a frequent contributor to the calendar pages - thank you for your work on the project. Fabricationary 06:44, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for doing that, and nicely done. FYI, information can be more thoroughly removed by following these steps: 1. delete page 2. recreate only the offending edit 3. move it to some new name 4. delete it 5. recreate the remaining edits of the original article.
Arbitrators and some others have a special tool called "oversight" which allows them to do all of that more easily. I asked one of them about it yesterday, but thanks for getting the job done in the meantime. BTW, I expect we'll see some more edits like this from the same editor before he leaves. Cheers, - Will Beback 06:35, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I do try. Except I realized I said "indented" instead of "intended." Oops. -- Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 18:31, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for working on this article to get it selectable. Much appreciated, as the author is a relative newcomer I gather... ++ Lar: t/ c 15:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
YOUR MEAN!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Missdog12 ( talk • contribs)
Well i was under the impression that 3 RR ment 3rd was the offending revert, i was wrong however. I now know otherwise. Matthew Fenton ( contribs) 17:00, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Joyous!, thanks for KEEP-ing the article on BarCamp. I'm confused, though, and a little disappointed, that the decision was by default, "no consensus among established editors"! By my count, there were 4 established WP editors:
I guess the math adds up to "no consensus," but I thought there would be more deliberation in the final decide. I worked hard to bring the article up to WP standards. I was eventually bold in my editing (I pretty much re-wrote it from scratch). But I was very cautious in approaching the discussion.
I know you're busy. But, I'm new and, having braved the waters, it's a bit discouraging. Any light you could shed here would help. Thanks!
— Latrippi 05:17, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
I noticed on your userpage that you were working on Newbery Medal-winning book articles, so I thought I'd go ahead and run this idea by you for feedback before embarking on the tedious procedure of enacting it.
I'm thinking of adding a succession box to every such article, as so:
Do you think this makes sense? ~ Booya Bazooka 16:39, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Re Miracles on Maple Hill: certainly. I created the redirect when we had two articles that basically said the same thing: "Virginia Sorenson is the author of the 1957 Newbery Medal winning Miracles on Maple Hill." and "1957 Newbery Medal winning book written by Virginia Sorenson." They should certainly be split apart again when there is more to be written about each. GeorgeStepan e k\ talk 23:22, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
I noticed that you recently applied an improperly formatted cleanup template. I have fixed the template, but felt I should tell you that it needed to be replaced. You can find a list of properly formatted cleanup templates here. Please note that it is never appropriate to substitute a cleanup tag.
Thank you very much for your contributions to Wikipedia. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Alphachimp talk 23:19, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
As a crusader for the well-being of potentially useful contributors, which I took you to be, regarding several comments you made, including unwillingness to padlock pages, incase new users are confused, or dont help out as a result, I would think that maybe you would have a few things to day on this. Cheers! Philc T E C I 23:39, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
I see a new article, Icelandology has just been created. I then discovered the above entry on your talk page in which you seem to have deleted a recent incarnation of the same title. I am trying to determine whether the article is a recreation of the previous article, or if it's an entirely different article. I cannot find a deletion log to show the old article. Purhaps you can look at the new incarnation. I don't wan't to bite someone who appears to be a new user by immediately posting a {{ prod}} or some other similar template. Agent 86 22:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
HELP! The following IP address: 62.25.109.194 keeps adding incorrect information to all the 2 Unlimited related articles. When I queried this on the 2 Unlimited talk page and his user page I got a load of abuse. As I am not an administrator, I am unable to do anything about this. As you are the only admin I've spoken to in my time on here, I wondered if you would be able to help. Triangle e 14:53, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
you revert all of my edits, at least give the other moderators something to do, are you stalking me? PEACE. Beyatch91 22:03, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Hah, that not-an-admin infobox? I've always thought of it mostly as a joke. And were you to nominate me, I'd have to decline. I hardly read Wikipedia anymore, much less sign in and contribute, so... I'd have to get heavily involved again to feel like being an admin, which might not happen. Thanks for mentioning it, though. The Literate Engineer 09:49, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
In the case of Talk:Melissa Farley where a person identified only as an IP address put a 'blp' box on what seemed to me a (short) pleasant and cordial discussion. Is there something wrong with what either of us said?
If not can the tag be removed?
In the case of Media portrayal of bisexuality someone IMMEDIATELY (before the initial data was even entered) put a 'merge' tag on. The site continues to be updated. And no further 'discussion' seems to ever have taken place.
As far as I can see only one person objected, that was two months ago and s/he seems to have lost interest. So can the tag be removed?
Thanks CyntWorkStuff 00:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
I got a message from you about my last edit being reverted. It was that thank you for experimenting, yadda yadda, the one you get when you screw with a page. Thing is, I don't recall having edited anything more than spelling and stuff recently. So.. why did I get this message? 69.37.103.86 00:53, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm answering here because you may log in again under a different IP address. This is the edit that prompted me to leave the message on the talk page. If you have a dynamic IP address, it may have been assigned to someone else who vandalized the article. If the message was meant for someone else, don't sweat it. Joyous! | Talk 01:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
A weasel words box has been placed on the above named article by User:Chooserr to register his/her political or theological disagreement with the subject of a given article. While not claiming to be an expert on the subject matter and admittedly being a novice and only occasional Wikipedia users, I have carefully reviewed the main PFLAG Site [2] and the weasel words entry and I must respectfully suggest that the box's present use was not it's intended use.
I have contacted User talk:Chooserr and seen her/his reasoning but still do feel this box should be removed. What is the proper next step please? Thank you CyntWorkStuff 20:26, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I've rewritten this article, and have added an additional reference which lists some disadvantages of the monolithic dome. I've removed the POV tag, and would appreciate it if you could proof the article and see if you agree. scot 14:37, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Hey its me again (darn!) I was just wondering if since your an admin, you once told me that you could see deleted pages(?) (I think) you could look and see if there is one on the article Fandangle I have since re added some of the info, but I remember seeing it, and wondered why it has gone. So, I was wondering if you could conform my mind is fabrcating things, or if I was right. Thank you! Philc T E C I 22:31, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
I haven't have a chance to wiki (at least logged in anyway) for a while and so I just logged on and saw your note on my talk page. Not sure why I wasn't doing that to begin with : ). Thanks. -- Wotwu 20:02, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I hope your Wikibreak is a restful one. -- HappyCamper 13:15, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Joyous!, an example is the best way to explain a story-form like this. Njál 17:15, 9 September 2006 (UTC) (Substitute another if you like, but there needs to be something. The EB article gives four.) Njál 17:19, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure the word exists, but it did do one thing: It let me know you were online! :) I'm back, re-adminned and adding lots of new stuff. How are you? Missed ya!! - Lucky 6.9 17:31, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
You know, it isn't necessarily vandalism. I happen to have coined the term "Anthonybradburyism" and I don't much appreciate your smelly ass removing my efforts to push humanity and society forward with innovative new terminology and new perspectives on "history". If we don't get to contribute to our reality anymore, why bother even living in it? Like, don't you have anything better to do? Seriously. I hope when I'm your age I'm doing something way cooler than what you're doing right now. Did you at least let Anthony Bradbury SEE what inspiration his attempts to suffocate my creativity has led to? Did you? Did you even let him read it before senselessly and brutishly clicking DELETE, therefore evermore removing my brand-new, barely-out-of-the-womb, fledgling concept from the vast pantheon of human history? How do you sleep at night. Really.
You have a nice day, too. Joyous! | Talk 19:08, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
i hope a wikiflock of wikirabid wikiraccoons finds you in your sleep and wikimauls you to wikideath. but i do love you.
_Thanks,I Guess_
i didnt know that was vanalism, i didnt know about the sandbox ;-)
also can you check the page i created #REDIRECT T3CHN0PH0B1A and tell me if this is spam...its on a band but im not sure if i did enough to help Wikipedia
Thanks for deleting the alternate words. It started out by just mentioning "pussy" as a less-vulgar alternative, then the whole world started adding others. The huge list of euphemisms needs a similar trimming, as does the near-useless Testimonials. I've been slowly copyediting the article over several months, with no complaints, but I haven't wanted to get rid of all that stuff in one fell swoop. Lou Sander 23:52, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
is it accaptable to remove the delete warning now that i have added some references? Cadmiumcandy 07:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC)