Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 31 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 4.

Hello, Elahrairah. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Hey, Elahrairah. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 20:43, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Elahrairah,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Ten Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for ten years or more.

Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 20:43, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. An article that I created, which you saved from speedy deletion on February 13 2017, was nominated for AfD on May 25 by the same group of contributors. I have defended the article and the notability of the subject, and I have added references exhaustively. The debate has grown stagnant, drawing little outside attention, and I have just now noticed that the article itself does not seem to be listed at all on the corresponding AfD page for that date. I am a new user, and I don't know how to remedy this apparent oversight. Anything you can do to provide guidance, as a nuetral force, would be greatly appreciated. ToddLara729 (talk) 23:37, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice but this user had provoke me to trashtalk for his vandalism to my Jason Brody article and to others by adding speedy deletion templates on a devilish way. There are plenty of users complaining about his vandalism. So will you please check out the article and report this user (If you will)? I just signed up 6 months ago so I'm still in the basics.

My thanks

Travis

@TravisGTAGamer: Ok, I had a look at the article and what's been going on there. I have to be honest, I can't see any evidence of vandalism there. Wikipedia has a strict definition of vandalism - edits that are intended to make the encyclopaedia worse. There might be edits that you think aren't much good, but if the other editor is making them in good faith then it's not vandalism. I know what it feels like to write an article, put a lot of work into it and then have people criticise it or even try to delete it. I've been there. But you just have to take it on the chin and remember that sometimes there'll be other editors here who disagree with you. You've just got to accept that, even if they don't do it in the best way.

When it comes to article tags, I can see that the article has a number of them, and I have to say they all seem justified. The article doesn't have enough references and needs more; it does seem a sensible suggestion to consider merging it with the Far Cry 3 article or at least have a discussion about that; and it may not meet the WP:GNG. Whether you disagree with that or not, it really is your responsibility to go to the talk page and discuss these issues with the people who've raised them, and try to convince them of what you think. You might not be able to; ultimately you might not get your way. That's just what happens sometimes and you have to accept it. But getting angry and throwing insults around will definitely end up with you getting blocked, so it makes no sense to behave like that. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 14:55, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Basalisk: Yeah, the vandal I am mentioning are the templates except for the "improve article template" It was clean before I saw this wikipedian adding the templates (again, except for the "improve this article" template) without reason so I had to spit out my anger to him to let him speak as he wouldn't speak on my first discussion on his talk page. I always keep an eye for my article without someone tagging it for a speedy deletion until this tough guy spawned. I was being nice to him on my first post on his talk page but keep on doing it. I also told him that I am still gathering more information for it to be a great article (that is why I did not erase the "improve this article" template). I just want to lock it to avoid users like him.

As you would see on his talk page, there are bunch of Wikipedians complaining about the same problem I am facing (same as my problem: using templates to ruin someone's work without a reason), but I had him explaining on my talk page. Sir, I am desperate for your help to stop this guy from his dirty works. I tagged him as a vandal user but he keeps on removing it. I don't know if real human Wikipedia admins are responsible for their inspection on every articles. I am concern if this article will be erased just because of this naughty guy using speedy deletion templates to vandalize articles that aren't really worth it to be erased.

I will be expecting your help, my thanks