Misplaced Pages

User talk:TenPoundHammer: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 13:49, 19 September 2012 editMiszaBot III (talk | contribs)597,462 editsm Robot: Archiving 2 threads (older than 7d) to User talk:TenPoundHammer/Archive 14.← Previous edit Revision as of 21:25, 19 September 2012 edit undoLessHeard vanU (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users33,604 edits re Misplaced Pages:Confirmation bias bias confirmed: new sectionNext edit →
Line 59: Line 59:


Consider ] for your usual AfD attentions. --] (]) 01:17, 19 September 2012 (UTC) Consider ] for your usual AfD attentions. --] (]) 01:17, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

== re Misplaced Pages:Confirmation bias bias confirmed ==

I am gently aghast that you have deleted the above fine and helpful ''essay'', especially since it was a subject of a ] - where the consensus was that the redirect be kept. While this was not a deletion discussion, I would infer that the inference was that none of the correspondents considered the ] to be a deletion candidate. I indeed suggest that there was in fact a demonstrated consensus to keep the page, via the redirect discussion (and thus fail the CSD criteria) and I should be grateful if you would undelete the page, and allow me to participate in the deletion discussion. Please could you respond at my talkpage, since I am retired, and do not monitor WP communications, but still have my userpage notifications enabled. ] (]) 21:25, 19 September 2012 (UTC) <br>
ps. Did I miss you getting the mop...? Shame on me!

Revision as of 21:25, 19 September 2012

NEW MESSAGES GO TO THE BOTTOM. NOT THE TOP.


I don't care if you respond to me here or on your talk page. But if you prefer the latter, please let me know in some way.

Template:Archive box collapsible

Talkback

Hello, TenPoundHammer. You have new messages at Jax 0677's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Big & Rich artist page

I removed the references in the "Collaboration and Special Appearances" section because they all went to the same reference. The paragraph that starts with "In 2005, the duo contributed vocals to a rerecording of Billy Joe Shaver's 1993 song, "Live Forever"" is followed with a reference, number 43. The next paragraph then mentions other songs that Big & Rich have been involved in and they are all the same reference, number 43. This reference directs the reader to a page on Amazon.com that lists an album by Billy Joe Shaver that features Big & Rich on a track, not a site that details Rich or Kenny writing songs for other artists. I'm not sure what happened but this needs to be fixed or deleted.

Talkback

Hello, TenPoundHammer. You have new messages at Dell9300's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, TenPoundHammer. You have new messages at Dell9300's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Grand Boulevard, Troost Avenue, Swope Parkway, Blue Parkway in Kansas City, MO

I don't care if it's a non-notable street. Please stop flagging articles. They are popular streets. Visionordream

tasty

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

Talkback

Hello, TenPoundHammer. You have new messages at SchuminWeb's talk page.
Message added 16:54, 15 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SchuminWeb (Talk) 16:54, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

MI Markose

Consider MI Markose for your usual AfD attentions. --DThomsen8 (talk) 01:17, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

re Misplaced Pages:Confirmation bias bias confirmed

I am gently aghast that you have deleted the above fine and helpful essay, especially since it was a subject of a redirect discussion back last December - where the consensus was that the redirect be kept. While this was not a deletion discussion, I would infer that the inference was that none of the correspondents considered the target page to be a deletion candidate. I indeed suggest that there was in fact a demonstrated consensus to keep the page, via the redirect discussion (and thus fail the CSD criteria) and I should be grateful if you would undelete the page, and allow me to participate in the deletion discussion. Please could you respond at my talkpage, since I am retired, and do not monitor WP communications, but still have my userpage notifications enabled. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:25, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
ps. Did I miss you getting the mop...? Shame on me!