| Revision as of 17:57, 23 November 2006 edit82.250.60.102 (talk) →Vandilism Comments← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:30, 23 November 2006 edit undoRyan Postlethwaite (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users28,432 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ==Wild Beasts Article== | |||
| Your article ] was deleted after consensus at ]. Do not recreate the article. If you want a review of the deletion decision, go to ]. ] 05:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC) | Your article ] was deleted after consensus at ]. Do not recreate the article. If you want a review of the deletion decision, go to ]. ] 05:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :I see that you are having a bit of trouble adding a request for deletion review on Wild beasts. Is there anything I can do to help you? ]] <sup>] to electro-pop ] from 1984.</sup> 16:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC) | :I see that you are having a bit of trouble adding a request for deletion review on Wild beasts. Is there anything I can do to help you? ]] <sup>] to electro-pop ] from 1984.</sup> 16:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 19:30, 23 November 2006
Wild Beasts Article
Your article Wild beasts was deleted after consensus at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Wild beasts. Do not recreate the article. If you want a review of the deletion decision, go to Misplaced Pages:Deletion review. NawlinWiki 05:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- I see that you are having a bit of trouble adding a request for deletion review on Wild beasts. Is there anything I can do to help you? Aecis 16:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
It's just the normal thing to do. You wanted a deletion review, so you're entitled to have the deletion reviewed. As I said in my reply to your nomination, the band Wild beasts doesn't yet pass the notability guidelines set by WP:MUSIC. Perhaps I also need to explain what I meant with "without prejudice", because that's a bit of jargon. It means that I don't oppose an article about Wild beasts once they are notable enough, or an article that asserts their notability right now. It means that I agree with the deletion of this particular version of the article. I believe that at this point in their career, Wild beasts haven't achieved enough for a wikipedia entry. While the deletion review is underway, you might also want to have a look at our list of requested articles. A lot of bands, singers, music genres, record labels etc. are still without an article. Perhaps you know enough about one or more of them, so that you can help fill in the gaps of wikipedia. Yours, Aecis 13:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Re: Tag for vandalism
I use a collection of a few scripts which make vandal reverting/warning nearly automatic, so that I can do it more quickly. Some of what I use (primarily rollback) are reserved for administrators only, but the Popups script is a popular one with many users. (ESkog) 19:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Vandilism Comments
Please do not believe that all changes are sandbox games or vandalism. Your presence in the Wikipedian world is rather recent. 82.250.60.102
- Misplaced Pages is about facts and should not be used to canvas personal opinion like you did on the page, this WILL be classed as vanidilism, I have also responded to your talk page Ryanpostlethwaite 17:28, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
This IS NOT and WAS NOT vandalism. 82.250.60.102
"If this is not vandilism you are wrtining in a completely biased unencyclopedic style, if you want to edit it, I have no problem with that, just change your style to be unbiased and make encylopedic comments Ryanpostlethwaite 17:43, 23 November 2006 (UTC)".
- You cannot even spell words correctly. How can you tell what is encyclopedic and what is not? Misplaced Pages is not the right place for you. 82.250.60.102
I am glad to see you found back reasonable ways of acting. 82.250.60.102