User talk:GB fan/Archive 5

rfp

can you please explain the reason why you denied my permission [1]?

I know you probably can't; it's just ridiculous; a new user wants to help out - crops a pic, wants to upload it, can't...asks for help and is denied.

Why? Am I gonna corrupt t3h wiki by outrageously uploading a picture?

It'd be interesting to hear your reasoning. Although I fully expect it'll be political bullshit.

Why oh why is Wikipedia *so* extremely antagonistic towards new users? Shaz0t (talk) 21:44, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

The community decided that certain tasks within wikipedia can only be done by auto-confirmed users. Some of those tasks are: uploading files, moving pages, editing semi-protected pages and using twinkle. There are times when a user needs to be confirmed outside of the normal 4 day and 10 edit rule that has been established by the community to accomplish those tasks. This is where an Admin has been given the responsibility to determine if the reason given is enough to ignore the rule and grant the right before meeting the 4 day and 10 edit requirement. In your case you asked for the rule to be ignored so you can upload a file. The consensus is that is not a valid reason for me to ignore the rule. There is a process in place for editors without the ability to upload files to have them uploaded. If you would like to calmly and politely discuss this I am open to that. If you would like a different admin to review my decision, you are welcome to ask someone else to do that and if they decide differently I will not disagree. You can even propose a change to the requirements for becoming auto-confirmed. GB fan 22:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Template:Attached KML/Interstate 10

I was about to create this page when I noticed the system-generated message that you had deleted a template page with this title - but I am unable to tell whether that was due to bad content, or whether there is a reason that page should not be created that I am unaware of. I will hold off on pasting the KML data into the template until I have heard from you, or until a reasonable time has elapsed. Thank you! Concertmusic (talk) 20:00, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

The template was created by 25or6to4, 9:56, 14 July 2012 and the 5 minutes later blanked the template with an edit summary of "broken, removed". It was then tagged by Begonia Brandbygeana, 4:01, 28 October 2012, with G7 and I deleted it because the only author blanked the page. There is no reason you can't create a template that works. If you want the code that was in the template, I can restore it for you but it is broken. GB fan 03:17, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I had created working code yesterday, and was ready to create the template when I saw the deletion message, hence my post to you. I will recreate the template with this working code now - thanks again! Concertmusic (talk) 13:16, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

OpenAirplane deletion

Please reinstate the page OpenAirplane deleted today. Its significance is that it is the first attempt in the United States to fundamentally change the way general aviation aircraft are rented post the 1980s litigation crisis in American aviation. I'll gladly add additional information and references. -Inverted22 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inverted22 (talk • contribs) 13:36, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

I can not do that. Upon further looking there are direct copy and pastes from some of the sources. You can start a new article that is written in your own words but I will not reinstate what is there because of the copyright violations. GB fan 23:21, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Fine. Can you at least email me a copy so I can re-use the layout/page structure? As you know, that's half the battle when creating Wikipedia entries. -Inverted22 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inverted22 (talk • contribs) 13:25, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Emailed GB fan 13:46, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Revised page created. Please let me know if this is more what you feel is appropriate. Thanks! Inverted22 (talk) 21:12, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

FN M1905

Question (and since it is impossible to interpret tone through text let me start off by saying I am NOT trying to be confrontational), how do you see FN M1905 as having context and content? I agree the page is not blank (did I use the wrong speedy-delete template?) but there are zero sources and the info is just cut and paste from a blurb about the gun in a magazine. I'm just trying to understand. I've had pages with dozens of sources and paragraphs and material deleted for being lacking in content. If you could help me understand I would appreciate it. :-) Thanks! --Zackmann08 (talk) 22:48, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

The version you marked for speedy deletion looked like this. A3, no content, is very specific about what "no content" means. No content means that the article only has a see also section, external links, a rephrasing of the title and other specific things. The article has more than that so no content does not apply. The other criteria that is similar is A1, no context. This only applies to articles where you can not determine what the article is about. I could determine the article was about a .25 ACP pistol, so it has context. So according the criteria, the article had context and content. Hope this explains. GB fan 00:56, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Basilica di San Fedele (Como)

I have wrote the article for this topic(Basilica_di_San_Fedele_(Como)). it's the translatation of the italian wiki article. How can I add it? You have deleted this page and so it's imposible to edit it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.66.244.118 (talk) 14:49, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

The article I deleted was created by User:IIIwo92. Are you IIIwo92? If so you can recreate it under that username. The article I deleted had no info at all just a notice that it was under construction. If that is not you, you can either create an account and then create the article or create the article at WP:Articles for creation. GB fan 15:08, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

NewsAndEventsGuy oopsie

Thanks for deleting the unwanted page in my user space. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 17:14, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

You are welcome, anytime. GB fan 17:37, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

TheGeneralUser (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hello GB fan! Wishing you a very Happy Merry Christmas :) TheGeneralUser (talk) 12:59, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

Finally getting around to my winter cleaning of my subpages. I made one mistake in all my tagging. Can you restore: User:Mkdw/Templates? Thanks for the rest. Mkdw^talk 03:46, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Your welcome, anytime, and that page is restored. GB fan 03:48, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

PAGE APPROVAL

Hi, I am the CEO and Manager of All Starz Gaming. An Esports Organization from India. We are currently ranked 1st in the country. Why was the page deleted ? I am the incharge of the team, and I have made the logo of the team as well. There is no copyright issue. Please to approve me to make the page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atulya.sachit.7 (talk • contribs) 18:55, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

The article you wrote, All Starz Gaming was deleted because there was no claim to significance. The article did not say why your gaming team is significant. Wikipedia only includes articles about topics that meet our notability guidelines. This basically means that reliable sources must have written about the subject first and then we create the article. I would suggest you read WP:FIRST, it discusses about writing your first article. GB fan 03:24, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

I do not need speedy deletion for that article. But, what template for deletion then I can use? --Ivan OS 17:24, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. I know that now. Thanks! --Ivan OS 17:27, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

thanks

thank you for telling me about how to delete the redirict Apple Turnover (Kings Dominion). please leave a message on my talk page. Starship9000 —Preceding undated comment added 15:15, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	I personally have respect for anyone that is willing to admit their own limitations and put their actions up for a review like you did at ANI. No one is perfect but if we look at our own actions and acknowledge our limitations it's a sign of wise person. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 14:20, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Juliet Schmidt for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Juliet Schmidt is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Juliet Schmidt until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:52, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Focus Wine Cellars

14:05, 3 January 2013 GB fan (talk | contribs) deleted page Focus Wine Cellars (A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)

Hello, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focus_Wine_Cellars is now "salted" for we have been trying to create it under the wrong category. We are a quite inexperienced to know the difference between different categories. We would now like to recreate it under "Turkey-org-stub" if appropriate. Could you be of help? I was recommended to contact the last person to edit. That is whay I am contacting you. Thanks for your response in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.96.21.73 (talk) 10:40, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

The article, Focus Wine Cellars, was deleted because the article did not explain how this company is significant not because it was created under the wrong category. There are some things I think you should read before you write any articles.

WP:FIRST - Writing your first article

WP:PSCOI - Plain and simple conflict of interest guide

WP:GNG - General notability guideline

WP:CORP - Notability guideline for companies

After you read these thing and if you still believe Focus Wine Cellars meets our guidelines for articles then you should start an article in userspace or at articles for creation. Assuming you are Bumerangozkan you could create the userspace draft at User:Bumerangozkan/Focus Wine Cellars. If you have any questions let me know. GB fan 14:38, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

apple turnover (kings dominon)

I took Apple Turnover (Kings Dominion) to Redirects for Discussion. --Starship9000 (talk) 01:01, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

I know, I have already made my comments there. GB fan 01:06, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Richard Manitoba / Caribou

I see you were involved earlier in the content dispute on Richard Manitoba. I have just had the article protected. Please come and add your 2c. Perhaps we can settle it. Thanks. Wwwhatsup (talk) 12:36, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of article The Film Company

Just requested a reconsideration of your deletion of The Film Company at the requests for undeletion page. Though it seemed rational based on the two-year old tag, the reason is no longer valid as the company is active and has just produced a new film (Goddess) to be released shortly. Thanks! Highspeed (talk) 21:12, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

PS: As I was editing this post on your talk page, the revert was approved. Highspeed (talk) 21:12, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Yingguo

From a common sense perspective, the creator's opinion is useless because (s)he has not made an edit in nearly 4 years. Almost all of his edits were redirects from the pinyin names of Korean entities, which are inappropriate per WP:FORRED. I am going to recreate it anyway—there is nothing to lose here. GotR ^Talk 00:31, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

You and I see it differently, but I will not remove it again, but I do disagree. G7 only applie when the only significant contribution to a page asks for deletion. Creation of the page is a significant contribution. GB fan 00:38, 20 January 2013 (UTC)r

What are you going to recreate? GB fan 00:39, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I have changed my mind based on response at User talk:Guerrilla of the Renmin#Yingguo. Not a good faith request to delete, since you plan on recreating the article with the same content. GB fan 01:01, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

And what is wrong with that? Why should the credit for creating an article go to someone else? I think it's unfair that someone else gets credit for his work Azylber (talk) 01:04, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

He gets credit for his work which is editing the page created by someone else. GB fan 01:06, 20 January 2013 (UTC)r

But the other person didn't actually create a PAGE. He just created a redirect. Redirects aren't considered pages. Azylber (talk) 01:19, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

You and I disagree, but I am done, will let another admin decide. GB fan 01:21, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok. Please let me add that I am sorry if my intervention might have been a bit annoying. It's just that I feel it's unfair if he doesn't get credit for what he did, and I get the impression that with a bit of common sense we could sort it out. For example, an idea could be, we change the current speeedy deletion criterion and we use G6-housekeeping instead. Would that make a nice compromise? I would just like to see common sense prevail. Could we do that? Azylber (talk) 01:36, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

G6 definitely does not apply. The compromise is to let a different admin decide if it should be deleted under any criteria. GB fan 01:40, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok, we'll see how it goes. Thank you for your help and for explaining your opinion. Happy editing! Azylber (talk) 01:43, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Who actually creates a title does make a difference in new page stats. I didn't realise this the previous summer, but I do now and use G6 (db-move) instead. GotR ^Talk 02:11, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

FYI

I quoted you at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Epeefleche#Outside_view_by_Bob_K31416 and Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability#Bot. --Bob K31416 (talk) 15:51, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

how to be a rollbacker?

Hello GB fan. I am wondering how I can be a rollbacker on wikipedia because I would want to warn users who vandalize wikipedia, violate wikipedias biographies of living persons, spamming, or does disruptive editing. How do I be a rollbacker on wikipedia? --Starship9000 (talk) 14:53, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

You do not need Rollbacker to warn users about anything. Rollbacker is just a way of quickly reverting edits. You need to learn basic requirements before you are granted rollbacker rights. You should work on the things discussed by Kudpung in your unblock requests. As others have recommended, you should consider being adopted to help you learn how Wikipedia works. GB fan 15:44, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I am actually doing that. --Starship9000 (talk) 16:01, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

You are actually doing what? GB fan 16:02, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of the page "Cheese Chat"

I looked at article A7 which is where the page seemed to violate the rules though I couldn't find a thing wrong with it in the terms listed. It seems to me, that you may be deleting everything which has been held for one, without even looking at both the rules and the article. I have read many other articles and they are basically the same as mine! I am hugely offended and great disappointment has befell on the young girl whom I made this page for. Why don't you just let a girl do something for a distant friend?

File:Cheese chat

--GangMom Smile (talk) 12:44, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

A7 is a speedy deletion criterion that has been discussed and approved by the community. The criterion only applies to specific types of subjects with web content being one of those. Articles can only be deleted if the article does not make any credible claim of significance or importance. The article, Cheese Chat, did not make any claim to significance at all. The article appears to be about a blog created in December 2012 by a young girl between 10 and 13 years old that gets 20 visits a day. She is also always begging people to publicise her blog. If you still believe the blog should have an article in Wikipedia the next step is to raise the issue at deletion review. GB fan 13:06, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Well someone's got their undies in a twist... And the by the way you made her almost cry! Have a heart! She is getting more hits by the day and they are global! If possible, her fans want to give you a reason for her blog's significance! And how can you say that she begs people to publicize her blog! I never said anything of the like, "GB Fan"! And so what, this article could make her more famous! One day she might be famous and you'll say "Hey, that name sounds familiar!" and actually, you were preventing her fame! And I am a high tempered redhead for your information and I won't rest until this page is put back up! I demand to speak of someone who is higher in the Wikipedia admin, what not, than you are! Maybe they have a bigger heart! --GangMom Smile (talk) 17:40, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

No undies in a twist, just explaining why the article was deleted and why I will not undelete it. As for my comment about her begging to publicize her blog, that came from the article that you wrote, here is the exact line, "She has only had the website since 7th December and is always begging people to publicise and comment and email etc." (emphasis added). If I misunderstood your words I apologize. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and we document notable subjects not ones that may someday become notable nor is our job to make people more famous. For contested speedy deletions the next step in the review process is to ask for the article to be undeleted at WP:Deletion review. There are instructions on how to file the request. Goodluck GB fan 18:00, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

kay, dude. Your hurting my eyes with all these words now. And so many hyperlinks are just making me blind. So I guess that I was being hyperbolic. Isn't that what encyclopaedias are like, now a days? You need to get people's attention! And have you even checked out Cheese Chat yet? http://cheeseechat.blogspot.co.uk/ there, now I've got a hyperlink too! Now I'm gonna take your advise and take your luck and just get out of the way for a while. A while. You know, it's only a request. --GangMom Smile (talk) 19:33, 28 January 2013 (UTC) (and another)

Only hyperlink you need to worry about if you still want the article undeleted, WP:Deletion review. Others will review my deletion and either uphold the deletion or restore the article. GB fan 19:37, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Hiya! It's the gal in charge of Cheese Chat here and I wanna tell you two that arguing over hyperlinks will not change the fact that the page has been fugdin' deleted! Now, just settle you differences and worry about the important thing here! MY FEELINGS! So, leave poor GB Fan alone CeCe! He's just doing his job! I don't care about this stupid encyclopaedia! (no offence) And you 2 have been rude about hyperbolically stertching out my "begging"! This is a public talk page! Well, actually it's this bloke's but hey, anyone can read it! And EDIT IT! So I'm gonna sign off by saying: calm down and eat some nutella/cheese unless allergic! *face palm* *face palm* *face palm* 90.196.10.3 (talk) 20:00, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't get the page you sent me. Oh, hi GangMom Smile! Odd moment... email me so we can get out of the way of GB Fan! (no offence!) Sorry GB Fan! We're kinda using your talk page as a chat room now! Feel Free to delete! I'll just ask someone else next time. And I sign out forever! Well, I hope that a kinder hearted dude is in charge of my next Cheese Chat page! And trust me, it's gonna be totz more significant! PS I was just on that Stephen's page and he said that you can get your deleted article back to improve. Can you by any chance do the same? GangMom Smile (talk) 20:13, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

2013 Japanese Regional Leagues

you guys had a bad mistake deleting that page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantasu (talk • contribs) 15:21, 27 January 2013‎

Why is that? GB fan 15:35, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

'cause I've explained the informations you were asking for then you deleted it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantasu (talk • contribs) 27 January 2013‎

Actually I did not delete the article. I nominated it for deletion and a different admin reviewed it and determined that it met the speedy deletion criterion. Your explanations did nothing to change my mind that the article did not add anything that was not already in the other article. If you disagree with the deletion you can discuss it with the admin who deleted it, Hex. If you are not satisfied with the outcome there the next step is Deletion review. GB fan 22:15, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Hex didn't talk to me yet, I hope if i creat the article again, no one delete it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantasu (talk • contribs) 23:37, 29 January 2013‎

The next step is to take it to WP:Deletion review not recreate it. GB fan 23:41, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

how can i do this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantasu (talk • contribs) 02:29, 30 January 2013‎

Did you click on the link I gave you, WP:Deletion review, and read the instructions at that page? GB fan 12:25, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I have no fluent english.--Dantas 12:31, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I can't explain it any better than that page. Sorry. GB fan 12:40, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Damn, that's not fair, I just want to contribute with japanese football..

It is not fair that I can not explain how to contest the deletion better than the page designed to do that? GB fan 13:56, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I didn't say that, but I had hard-working creating that article and they made confusion deleting that one..

Sorry, it's me again!

hi! It's me! GangMom Smile (talk) 18:47, 30 January 2013 (UTC) and I wanna ask if you can, perhaps, give me the copy of the article I wrote? The Cheese Chat one, by the way, the one which you had certified as "(forgot the word) for "Speedy Deletion"" Well, forget the details! What I want is the copy so that I can edit it, and improve it, and do some stuff to prove it's significance! Well, User:Stephen**** (*=a letter I dunno)said he would so.... --~~ You know who...

I have placed the article in your userspace at User:GangMom Smile/Cheese Chat. You can work on it and improve it, if it does not get improved within a few months to the point that it is ready as an article then I will redelete it. I would suggest you look at WP:FIRST, it is a page that talks about creating your first article. GB fan 20:35, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, dude! Will check out the hyperlink! — Preceding unsigned comment added by GangMom Smile (talk • contribs) 20:31, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello sir. I am Srikanth aka (Raghusri). Thanks for the speedy deletion of mistakenly created user sub page. Have a happy day and happy editing sir. Thank you. Raghusri (talk) 13:42, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Korn

Can I please ask advice on how to deal with these types of disputes? I know for a fact that the band formed as Korn in 1993 when Jonathan came into the band. The one guy has been adamant that its 1992 based on erroneous information. He has insisted on a consensus but still makes the edits. Advice would be greatly appreciated! I also am in a unique position of knowing the band personally. I watch the pages for vandalism and erroneous information, such as this date. Nbcwd (talk) 03:39, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

WP:DR gives advice on dispute resolution. GB fan 03:44, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Request Revision Deletion

Hello GB fan,

I would like to request a revision deletion. Basically a friend and I changed the JJ72 wikipedia page briefly on the 5th of February 2013 and filled it with a load of nonsense about a friend and then changed it back. I would like to request that all past edits for the 5th of February 2013 in the History section are deleted because the are defamatory and libelous. I apologise for any inconvenience caused. Kind Regards

Orkface1 (talk) 13:10, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi GB fan, I have already deleted the revisions from the history of the article (JJ72) as they also approached me. Kind regards, James086^Talk 14:28, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

I've now also suppressed some of these, per policy, as they went over the edge on being potentially libelous - Alison ^❤ 17:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

User talk:68.191.214.247

Hi GB fan,

I have a feeling there must be more going on that I don't know about. You blocked 68.191.214.247 (talk · contribs) for personal attacks; could you show me where? Is there some kind of sockpuppetry going on, so there's a history I don't see? --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:52, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

This is what I say is a personal attack, [2]. Also User:OGBranniff was blocked for the same kind of comments, [3]. GB fan 01:00, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

But, 68.191.214.247 is *quoting* OGBranniff in an attempt to report him for making that personal attack. He's complaining that OGBranniff can say that without getting blocked. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:04, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

I made a mistake, thanks for pointing it out. I have unblocked them. GB fan 01:15, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

OK, great, thank you. I guess, unlike me, you aren't pefrect. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:16, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Stendan

Can a page be deleted as an attack when it's about characters in a soap opera? This is about characters in Hollyoaks and looks to me like a plot resumé not an attack. I couldn't guarantee that it IS a plotline that has been used - I don't watch television (except for some historical or archaeological stuff, at a friend's). I was about to detag it when I found you'd deleted it. I'm not sure about the value of it as an article, however, and I was going to prod it. Peridon (talk) 20:27, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

You are right. Did not read the whole article and missed the part about the actors. The first part is reads like it is about real people. I have restored it. GB fan 20:34, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

I think I've been caught like that before now... I've prodded it. Can't think of a speedy for it unless it's totally made up, and I try to avoid soap stuff. (Having said that, I went quite deep into an Emmerdale hoax once.) Peridon (talk) 20:51, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you don't have to go all offensive...

Hi GB Fan, I understand that there were lapses on my part while looking thru your article, but that doesn't mean you have to belittle me and go all out offensive... You could have told me a bit politely... I understand that its your hardwork and that anyone would be angry, I have my own set of AfDs also... But no need to get all worked up... Keep Calm and Carry On... And as an added measure I will not put articles for deletion without a notice sent to the editor prior to the proposal...I'm sorry I'm not trying to hit back at you for my mistake, but just asking you to be a little polite that's all... You are after all a more accomplished editor than I am, all I can do is learn from you!!! So I'm Sorry! Ajayupai95 (talk) 04:08, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

TITLE NAMING AIOCD AND JAGANNATH SHINDE

I HAD POSTED THE CONTENT 3RD TIME AND THE EDITED CONTENT HAS ENOUGH MATERIAL TO POST ON WIKIPEDIA AND SUFFICIENT ENTERNAL LINKS.IMAGES AND COPYRIGHTS CONDITIONS ARE ALSO SATTISFIED AND APPROPRAITE NAMING IS ALSO OFFERED — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manishransubhe (talk • contribs) 05:58, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Advice needed...

Hi GB Fan, this is Ajayupai95, and I'm very sorry for my requests for speedy deletion... You can see that I've cut down on speedy deletions and reviewing it very carefully... Btw, I came across a set of articles, namely- Syria at the 2013 Mediterranean Games, Spain at the 2013 Mediterranean Games, and so on.. written by the same editor... What would you want me to do??? Should I ask him to collaborate all of them into one article or just let it be??? Ajayupai95 (talk) 11:07, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Those articles do not provide much content, just that the country is expected to participate. I would suggest you ask someone that works with that type of article. You can contact someone on these lists. GB fan 13:13, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

I got no words...

What can I say, You Bit Back, now I completely understand what it must feel like to a person when there article is put for speedy deletion...

You Sir, deserve some real bubble tea... Ajayupai95 (talk) 12:51, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

The editor that tagged your article for speedy deletion obviously didn't understand the criterion they tagged your article with. There are many articles tagged incorrectly and it takes time for admins and others to clean up the bad tags. No one should have to deal with articles tagged incorrectly. GB fan 13:07, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Financial Tycoon (album)

Following a request at User talk:York Earwaker#Speedy deletion nomination of Financial Tycoon (album) would you consider a userfiying this so the editor can work on it ? LGA _{talk to me} 23:56, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Replied there GB fan 00:13, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

2025 FIFA Confederations Cup

Hi. I noticed that you have declined a request from other user to delete the subject article. However, it is nothing but false information, because 2025 FIFA Confederations Cup will be hosted by the host country of 2026 FIFA World Cup, which will be determined by FIFA several years later, and even only 3 countries are considered as Potential candidates. Please compare both articles, and see how the article was vandalized. And the user who created the article is possibly a sockpuppet of User:Mauricio80, who has been blocked indefinitely. Thanks ---What can I do for someone?- (talk) 17:05, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

When it isn't obvious the user tagging the article needs to explain. A random admin reviewing speedy deletion requests isn't going to necessarily going to know why. Based on the info you provided, G3 might apply. Even with this information A3 does not apply because there is content in the article. G5 does not apply to an article that was created by someone who is "possibly a sockpuppet" of an indefinitely blocked user. If we are going to accuse someone of being a sockpuppet a sockpuppet investigation needs to be filed. If you want to retag the article and explain why it meets the criteria you can do that. GB fan 17:26, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

WP:REFUND

I was just browsing the WP:REFUND archives, and came across Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 83#incruit, which you closed as "not done." Please be aware that AfDs with little or no participation should be treated as PRODs for this purpose; usually this applies when zero or one person other than the nominator !votes for deletion. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 13:27, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the information, I will remember that. GB fan 01:03, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Accolade Competition

Hi GB fan,

I have restored Accolade Competition, an article you deleted after the proposed deletion expired. I see plenty of non-PR coverage in the mainstream media through Google News, so I believe the competition to pass WP:GNG. If you disagree, you are welcome to initiate an AfD. If you start such a discussion, I would be grateful if you would let me know.

Neelix (talk) 18:54, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, no problem. GB fan 01:05, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

For saving List of Romanian politicians and adding the TOC thing. Cheers! ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 11:50, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, your welcome, saw that huge toc and it looked ugly and I had used that toc somewhere else and it makes it look so much better. GB fan 11:53, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Wouldn't have noticed, I have TOC on "hidden" in my preferences! ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 13:36, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Username

Are you a packer fan? –BuickCenturyDriver 14:07, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that is what the GB stands for. GB fan 14:13, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Heaven Knows (Rise Against single)‎

It says templates, I figured that applied. RNealK (talk) 02:32, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Harry Welch / Harry Edward Welch, Jr.

When creating a redirect from "Harry Welch" to "Harry Edward Welch, Jr.", an article I have just posted, I got a message telling me to contact you since you deleted my previous "Harry Welch" article. That was deleted after I blanked the page because I realized that more work was necessary before the article could go up and withstand scrutiny. I have now done that work, and the completed article is up as "Harry Edward Welch, Jr." The finished article includes several citations to newspaper articles about the subject, establishing notability. Anyway, just thought I would follow procedure and let you know.

Richard Lagrand Heaton, Mar. 6, 2013, 11:09 PST — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Lagrand Heaton (talk • contribs) 19:09, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, It is no problem since the original deletion was because you had requested it, not for cause. GB fan 19:52, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

why deleted?

Hi, i wonder why my page is deleted... that link is our website too, and i am also doing our website... what else can i do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michjan28 (talk • contribs) 19:09, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

i wrote that history in our website... www.pamcsk.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michjan28 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I see you have already received an answer to your question at the help desk along with the steps to take to release the copyright of the website. If you have any additional questions let me know. GB fan 22:03, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Jenna Rose for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jenna Rose is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jenna Rose (4th nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rogerthat94 (talk) 10:11, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

The Lawyers on Demand vandal

He's back! This time with a username that violates WP:CORPNAME - see User talk:Xenion Legal. Thanks Roger (talk) 20:27, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Ciara

Found it. It was an odd combination of stuff in the source article: one url that began with http://www.billboard.com/#/artist/..../chart-history, which is what I use to figure out that I may have a chart URL on my hands, and another URL way down in the article that ended with ?f=xxx&g=Singles, which is what I use to find the end of the chart URL, but that second URL was an invalid URL so my bot didn't see it. The bot mangled the two of them together and replaced the whole kit and kaboodle. Seems to be pretty rare, and the bug fix is pretty easy.—Kww(talk) 22:25, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Good to know you got it figured out. GB fan 01:46, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Jacques Steinberg

Hi GB, on Jacques Steinberg, I was going to build up his page but can't really find anything that explained why he would be notable. Did you find something? Thanks.Malke 2010 (talk) 02:02, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I haven't looked at the article enough to make an assessment if he is notable. Speedy deletion has a much lower level, significance. There is a credible claim of significance, the Hechinger award. If you feel he is not notable you can nominate for deletion using wp:prod or wp:afd. GB fan 10:52, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm not sure the Hechinger award is enough to justify an article. I'll do another Google search and see if I can find anything before an AfD. But in comparison, RJ Gibb had more notability. The AfD on him was merge to his father. Appreciate your time. Malke 2010 (talk) 15:06, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't know if it is enough to justify an article either, but I do know that it is enough to survive a speedy deletion. If you can't find anything take it to AFD. GB fan 20:32, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

editor subpages

GB, how can I get some of my subpages deleted? Do I have to nominate them for speedy delete? [4] Malke 2010 (talk) 15:23, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

You can tag any you want deleted with {{db-user}} and an admin will stop by and delete them. GB fan 02:08, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Malke 2010 (talk) 18:42, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I AM REALLY UPSET!!!

WP:CSD: It is irrelevant whether the claim of notability within the article is not sufficient for the notability guidelines. If the claim is credible, the A7 tag can not be applied. Often what seems non-notable to a new page patroller is shown to be notable in a deletion discussion. GO AND UNDELETE Juan Canaro NOW! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fixlinkfix (talk • contribs) 17:53, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I believe you that you are upset. I have gone back and reviewed the deleted article and do not see any claim to significance in it. If you ask, I can place the article in your userspace where you can work on it. GB fan 18:11, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Susan Anderson

Can you send me the content I wrote for this article.. I need it for an assignment I did for a class.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amorris23 (talk • contribs) 03:55, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I have restored the content to a subpage, User:Amorris23/Susan Anderson- Doctor of Naturopathy. GB fan 11:11, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Help desk response

thanks Maade123454 (talk) 22:56, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

You are welcome, if you have any questions let me know. GB fan 23:08, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

why was H.K. Gidwani High School page not deleted?

thank u — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tapan joshi (talk • contribs) 04:03, 23 March 2013‎

I did not delete it because "irrelevant" is not among the criteria listed in criteria for speedy deletion. As I explained on your talk page the criteria are very specific. If the article does not meet any of the specific criteria listed there an Admin should not delete it. GB fan 12:51, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Phil Taggart

Hi GB fan

I notice with concern you deletion of this page. I wish to challenge and examine your rationale and have done so in the "talk section" of his page.

Please address my concerns and justify your position as currently, I think you are completely wrong in doing so. Fred — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fhoward1 (talk • contribs) 16:57, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Copied from Talk:Phil Taggart

Hi GB fan I noticed you deleted this page. You personally may not find him of significance but given that he has an average audience of around 1million people per night in the UK, has a huge cultural influence on music consumption and has been pivotal to the success of number of high profile public figured, I hope you forgive me in challenging you on this.

The articles I reference expressly show is significance by demonstrating press coverage out in the public domain.

Furthermore, other organisations such as twitter have perceived him as significant which is why he has a verified account.

Furthermore, I wish to point you to precedence. A number of his colleagues and people of joint stature (such has his co-host) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Levine have their own pages.

Please justify your position below as I think it is wrong.

Perhaps you personally may not find him of importance, but to his 1 million listeners each night, he is. Best, Fred

The reason I deleted the article is because there was no claim to significance in the article. There is no precedence on Wikipedia. Just because an article on a person/company/organization/product exists does not mean that all similar subjects also should articles. Each article is evaluated on its own merit to see if it should exist. I have gone back and reviewed the article again and still do not see any claim to significance in the article. The article in summary, Phil Taggart was born, grew up, co-presents a radio show and started his radio career on BBC Ulster. There is nothing there that is any claim to significance. There are a couple of pages that it would be helpful for you to read.

Wikipedia:Your first article

Wikipedia:Notability

I am willing to discuss this more if you would like. GB fan 20:12, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I have read both pieces you reference and still believe that your decision was wrong. Especially with regards to Notability. Phil Taggart has been references in a number of pages on Wiki Pages and therefore I believe he requires a "stand alone" page. I notice with great concern that you are also new to this so I suggest we find a 3rd party to evaluate both our concerns and your decision. Fred — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fhoward1 (talk • contribs) 15:23, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand why you think I am new to this, I have been editing with this account for over 4 years and an administrator for a year and a half. If you disagree with my decision you can raise the issue at WP:Deletion review. Or if you want I can restore the page to your userspace and you can work on it more. GB fan 16:14, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Account blocking

Please excuse me for asking this here, but I have no other way of contacting you.

My query relates to the blocking of account Duupdater in quotes:

"This account is currently blocked. The latest block log entry is provided below for reference:

22:36, 30 August 2012 GB fan (talk | contribs) blocked Duupdater (talk | contribs) (autoblock disabled) with an expiry time of indefinite ({{softerblock}})"

Do you suspect the person is falsely impersonating him/herself as Deakin University updating team? My feeling is that the original history that was put in myself is of superior quality compared to what the Duupdater left behind. Do you share my view? Jaker5 (talk) 13:47, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Do you suspect the person is falsely impersonating him/herself as Deakin University updating team?

No I do believe they are the Deakin University updating team. The reason the account was blocked is because usernames can not give the indication that the account is shared, see WP:ISU. Also it is blocked because the account stated on the user page, User:Duupdater, that it was used by Deakin University web team. Clearly the account was meant to be shared by multiple people on the team and sharing of an account is not allowed, see WP:NOSHARE.

Do you share my view?

I haven't read what was there before or what is there now. I personnally have no interest in or know anything about the university. What the article should look like is up to the editors working on the article. I just dealt with the policy issues concerning the account.

I hope this answers your questions. If you need anything else let me know. GB fan 14:08, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Jaker5 (talk) 17:30, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipediaing

Hello. You deleted this page that I PRODded. Well, I was planning to include it at WP:DAFT. Would that be a good idea? If so, could you post an excerpt of the article (preferably the definition) on my talkpage? Thank you and happy editing. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 06:02, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Definition posted on your talk page. GB fan 10:50, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Space Shuttle Challenger disaster

Thank you. I was afraid that adding neutral perspective might prove difficult with NASA-related articles. --85.197.17.113 (talk) 16:43, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Protecting the page on his edit

User Canoe claims Judge Judy and Randy Douthit were never sued. Care to explain to me why these articles read "Judge Judy sued" if this is untrue and the entirety of them have to do with Judge Judy and Randy Douthit. [5] [6]. Making it say the lawsuit against the show's production company is irrelevant because the Judge Judy show itself was sued as result of Randy Douthit and Sheindlin herself was sued as a result of Randy Douthit giving her misinformation on a domestic dispute at least according to him.

Furthermore, Canoe is misrepresenting the information and now the edit is WRONG. In addition, he's removed the most controversial portions out of the racism lawsuit section which were Randy Douthit's alleged remarks about blacks: "We're not doing any more black shows," and "I don't want to hear black people arguing."

I don't know if Canoe is white and it possibly rubbed him the wrong way to have information regarding the possible racism of a white person or what, but whatever the case is, he has misrepresented the material in the article. Whatever the case is, the original matter at hand in the debate we were all having was scaling down the material and whether or not it should be added. That's when I scaled it down and Canoe then started changing material that wasn't in the sources and then saying Judy and Randy never got sued. Clearly she was sued as according to ABC News, Huffington Post, Washington Post, New York Post, etc., and all the sources that say in headline "Judge Judy is sued." As it seems you two are only interested in belligerence, I'll be taken the matter to another wikipedia administrator to have them look over the sources in question and your biased actions in reinstating an erroneous edit on behalf of what is likely a user that you have a connections with. Good day! AmericanDad86 (talk) 00:54, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I have no connections with Canoe or Judge Judy or anything else associated with this article. I welcome other admins looking at my actions. Bring it up any place you would like and we will see the outcome. In my opinion you should be blocked for a long period for your edit warring, 12 reverts today is way over the top. GB fan 00:58, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

You should be stripped of your editing protection tools and blocked for abusing them. You yourself have formally admitted on administrative noticeboards that you have in fact worked with Canoe in the past. How'd I know this?! How'd I know this?! You didn't even half to tell me. It was clear based upon your blatantly ignoring his reverts and misconduct, which in turn will be reported. I full well plan on reporting that abuse to other admins.AmericanDad86 (talk) 01:44, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I have seen lots of editors around. That does not mean I play favorites. When we are talking about a living person we err on the side of caution so in my protection I did. If I was wrong other admins will tell me and I will revert my changes. It is better to be over protective rather than under protective when we come to protecting the reputation of living people. GB fan 01:50, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I did not admit that I have worked with Canoe in the past, I admitted to seeing him around. GB fan 01:52, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

I just wanted to thank you for putting things into perspective on the requests for confirmed page. Valuable advice like that only comes around every so often. I hope to see you around on Wikipedia in the future! Thanks so much, if you have any further criticism or suggestions for me, please do tell (it's like tea, I can't get enough of the stuff!) ChaseAm (talk) 23:08, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Sandra Gidley page

Dear GB fan I am struggling finding my way around Wikipedia as it is not my area of expertise so please excuse me and I am not sure how to find my way back here! My concern relates to the Wikipedia entry about me which has recently been heavily edited by somebody called donkeyride69.

The article has been very selective with facts in order to portray me in a negative light. For example, my expenses were actually deemed to be fine and I had no questions to answer. The complaint about office expenses was a mischievous complaint by a member of my political opponent's team and, when investigated was proved not to have foundation. It is true that for a couple of years my expenses were the highest in Hampshire but they were all investigated and deemed appropriate expenditure (I can go into reasons for them being high if you require more information but it is not really pertinent). In addition the statement that I moved to a more expensive flat is incorrect - and libellous - as public records will show.

It is perhaps a coincidence that I will be standing for election in the forthcoming English County Council Elections and I can only conclude that this mischievous edit is related. It is also noteworthy that my political opponent at the last General Election was Caroline Nokes and her entry has been edited, by the same person, to try and portray her in a more favourable light. I might also add that my opponent in the forthcoming COunty Council elections is the father of Caroline Nokes (a certain Roy Perry).

The input by donkeyride69 is clearly heavily biased and all I am asking is that recent edits to my page by this person are removed due to libellous content, lack of objectivity and balance and that the page is restored to its previous content. Happy to discuss further and provide more details if necessary but as the bias is so obvious and some of the content is libellous I hope you will be able to expedite a rapid reversion of the revision.

Thanks you very much Sandra Gidley 90.221.166.183 (talk) 22:04, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I am not familiar at all with English politics but the edit made to Sandra Gidley do appear to give undue weight to negative and as such I have removed them. I will watch the article but like I said I do not know much about things that happen in England. You might raise the issue at the Biographies of Living Persons Noticeboard, WP:BLPN. The editors that monitor that board are very knowledgeable about BLP concerns and I am sure some of them are familiar with English politics. GB fan 22:36, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Richard_France/sandbox

Hi! You correctly deleted Richard France/sandbox as a test page. If you look at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2013 March 30#Referencing help needed, you'll see that Technical 13 (talk · contribs) was helping Filmian (talk · contribs) with the formatting of a draft article, trying to recover article text and footnotes that had been keyed in Wordperfect. Since Technical 13 has been blocked, he's not going to get round to reposting that page. Could you email me a copy of the deleted page, so that I can try to see where he got to? Or, if Technical 13 managed to post the article text and its footnotes in some form, it could be userfied to User:Filmian/Sandbox. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:17, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I have emailed you the article. Technical 13 only made two edits to the sandbox, edit summaries as follows:

1. Written with WordPerfect X6, "Published as" HTML, converted with Help:WordToWiki#Quick
2. Little bit better, but a lot of small text

Hope it helps, if you want it userfied let me know. GB fan 00:23, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! I have updated Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Richard France with an edit summary credit for Technical 13's involvement. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:21, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Global Advertisers Wikipedia Page

It was deleted when I has updated it before. Can you please let me know what was the problem? So I can work on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VishakhaSaigal (talk • contribs) 05:16, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia has developed guidelines to determine when it should have an article about a subject. The general notability guideline discusses how to determine if a subject is notable. The basic concept is that a subject must have been noticed by reliable sources. Your article (that you have created 4 times now) says that the company is a outdoor advertising company. It doesn't say why it is any different than any other outdoor advertising company. Are there any other sources that discuss the company? GB fan 12:23, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Could I snatch some criticism or suggestions from you?

Hello GB fan, sorry to bother you. I know that you made some a very constructive criticism for me a few days ago, so I was wondering if it's possible you could scan over my contributions and make some suggestions as to what I'm doing wrong/criticism in general? Even just one quick comment would be great, if you've the time. If not, I completely understand, we all are a bit short of time sporadically. Thanks so much ChaseAm (talk) 17:04, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

I do not have much time right now, but I will look over your edits in a day or so. GB fan 22:01, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Y Sounds excellent, take as much time as you need! ChaseAm (talk) 22:53, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Rim of the World High School Wikipedia Page

Hello!

I am the New Social Media Consultant for Rim of the World High School, and I would like to know why you are attempting to delete sections of OUR page, which we are in the middle of adding information to. If you have a legitimate reason, then please let me know, thank you for Holding down the fort for us in the beginning, but we are finally ready now, and would like to be able to work on this page by ourselves. Rim High is capable of making our own edits, and not having individuals who we do not recognize making edits for us. Let me know how we can resolve this issue...

-Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrewholmes24 (talk • contribs) 02:34, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

The first point I need to make is that the page is not yours, no one owns any Wikipedia article. Wikipedia is a collabrative effort to create an encyclopedia. The next point is that you create a very bad impression when you leave an edit summary that I "maliciously deleted" the information. There was nothing malicious about my removal. I explained in my edit summary exactly why I removed that information. The page that we are editing is called "Rim of the World High School" and the section we are talking about is "Chronological History of the Rim of the World U.S.D." This information MAY belong in the article, Rim of the World Unified School District, but it does not belong in the high school's article. The information should not just be a list of events, it should be written in paragraphs that explain the information. I have removed it again. You appear to be trying to make the page a website instead of an article. Also I have reverted your edits that changed the header levelsand image sizes. Our manual of style specifies that base level headers in articles are second level "==" and that pictures unless necessary are thumb sized. I will link this section back to the article's talk page, Talk:Rim of the World High School, and any further discussion should happen there. Last point for now, you should also read about conflict of interest, Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. GB fan 11:08, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Dantae Johnson

Hi, I noticed you declined the speedy delete request for the article Dantae Johnson. Could you point out what his claim to significance is so that I don't make the same mistake in the future? Thanks! Rgambord (talk) 13:50, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I take this, "Dantae has also has written a debut song for The X Factor finalists 2011" as a claim to significance. Is there enough to survive a deletion discussion, it doesn't look like it. GB fan 14:21, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I WP:PROD it and notified the creator. Thanks!Rgambord (talk) 14:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Please don't ignore policy

I invite you to self-revert this edit [7] for the reason I have outlined on the talk page. Your actions are not in accordance with policy and shortcutting that process smacks of IDONTLIKEIT. 3142 (talk) 13:39, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

What policy am I ignoring? GB fan 14:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

And just so we are clear, I will not revert that edit. I do not belive the Delta Flyer is notable enough to have a standalone article. I do not believe the sources are available based on my searches. If you have sources either present them on the talk page so people can see them or be bold and revert my edit then add them to the article. GB fan 14:59, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

$ensible - why deleted

Hi, I am enquiring as to why $ensible user page was deleted? 00:06, 5 April 2013 GB fan (talk | contribs) deleted page User:$ensible (G10: Attack page or negative unsourced BLP) Also, I get the impression that something was written on it - not by me - are you able to tell me what was written please? Cheers $ensible (talk) 03:51, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for not getting back to you right away, I read your post when I was unavailable to look at the deleted content and then forgot about the question. The page was edited by one person. They made some negative comments that discussed their opinion of why you are editing Wikipedia and you as a person. If you are interested and you enable email, I can email the contents of the page to you. GB fan 19:13, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I am interested and I have enabled email. Much appreciated. $ensible (talk) 05:14, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

I have emailed you the content of the userpage. GB fan 10:26, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you.

Thank you for reverting my talk page and looking out for things. I filed an SPI report and The Bushranger put a 24hr block on are favourite editor. Bgwhite (talk) 02:13, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

You are welcome, I saw the outcome. I was thinking about doing the same thing, but considering whether I was involved so I held off. GB fan 02:16, 20 April 2013 (UTC) GB fan 02:16, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Samsung_SGH-D720

The Samsung_SGH-D720 is a Symbian phone completely unrelated to the Samsung SPH-D720 (which is a model of the Nexus S, an Android phone). If you want to contest the speedy deletion, just blank it. But don't revert to the incorrect redirect. I think we can all agree that misinformation is worse than no information. A blank article with no speedy deletion template is fine. Reverting to incorrect redirect... not so good.--173.51.106.236 (talk) 06:39, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Well another admin has decided that a blanked redirect qualifies for speedy deletion under A3 so it is deleted. I am not going to argue the point even though I believe it is a mis-spplication of the criterion. GB fan 10:16, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Alpha Delta Phi Crest

Hello, I am enquiring about the deleted crest of the Alpha Delta Phi page. Since it is a non-free seal logo and is the official crest of the organization shouldn't it be allowed?

Thank you, A — Preceding unsigned comment added by Addyduong (talk • contribs) 01:17, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes it is allowed and I have added it to the page. GB fan 01:23, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Addyduong (talk • contribs) 01:27, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy deletion review

Thanks for the speedy deletion review at page, Steven G. Kaplan. I recently improved the sourcing and Filmography tables for Steven G. Kaplan and for Rainstorm Entertainment. I came across these two pages after working on successfully getting the article Fuck (film) up to WP:GA quality rated status.

There are several issues here that require admin attention. I'm wondering where to report this. There are several blatant WP:SPAs at these pages.

1. VINTON2468 (talk · contribs) = Babybirdhouse (talk · contribs) these smell like WP:DUCK socks of each other. Notice one replying in talk page thread started by the other one DIFF.
2. Then we have this apparent possible site policy violation by Babybirdhouse (talk · contribs), DIFF, apparently trying to inappropriately identify Godzilla2362 (talk · contribs) in an on-wiki posting.
3. Both Steven G. Kaplan and Rainstorm Entertainment prior to the referencing improvements I've tried to make, have in the past historically been tagged with notability, nominated for speedy deletion, nominated for prod, etc. I hope the sourcing improvements I've made will stop that from happening, but vandals could still come by with page-blanking vandalism as they've done in the past.

What do you think is the next step here? Can you help out with this matter?

Thank you for your time, — Cirt (talk) 10:38, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Update: Reported to Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Steven_G._Kaplan. — Cirt (talk) 16:52, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I was travelling today so I didn't see this till now. It looks like it is taken care of at least for now. I have the article watchlisted also but at least for the next couple of days it should be good. GB fan 23:22, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks very much! — Cirt (talk) 02:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Reversals of reversals to Sandra Gidley page

Hello - I contacted you previously about the edits to my profile by someone calling themselves donkeyrider69. You reversed his edits on the grounds of undue bias. I find that some of these changes have now been reinstated. Is there any way that this person can be blocked because I believe his intentions are malevolent Sandra Gidley 90.215.120.126 (talk) 22:12, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Like I said last time you raised this question, I am not familiar at all with English politics. I think you should raise your concerns at the Biographies of Living Persons Noticeboard, WP:BLPN. The editors that monitor that board are very knowledgeable about BLP concerns and I am sure some of them are familiar with English politics. GB fan 00:29, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Comment

"a claim of importance and that is enough to survive speedy deletion and it is not overly promotional"

Claim is unsubstantiated, it is promotional and self-promotional by proxy (using notbaility circumvention)

Here is why:

Quote: "page should not be speedily deleted because... the Women's Annex Channel is very important..."

1) the Women's Annex Channel IS NOT Film Annex. Thus, question remains, why Film Annex should remain as article entry? 2) Notability (or the lack thereof) is verifiable. Looking at the references (1. through 19.) none of them are actual news coverage from economist, bloomberg, or any other independent, or verifiable source. References 20 through 22 are blatantly self-promotional. 3) Section "Notable Channels" refers to an individual, Roya Mahboob, who has a channel on Filmannex, as do others have channels on Youtube, Vimeo, or anywhere else. Section "Philantropy" is not referenced, and thus verified by any other outside independent source. This is questionable, at least. 4) Fact is: Here is a private entity, i.e. filmannex.com, allowed having an article on WP, which violates basic WP guidelines, rules and WP credibility. 5) Based on 1)-4) the question arises: is this attempting to circumvent WP:N Notability? Wikipatrolwatch (talk) 13:59, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

If you believe the article should be deleted you have 2 options at this point. You can try to use WP:Prod but I see that ending very quickly as anyone can remove it for any reason and the speedy deletion was contested by someone. The other option that can not be ended until a decision is made is WP:AFD. To stop a speedy deletion all it takes is a claim of significance which is a much lower standard than notability. No one is trying to circumvent WP:N just to properly apply the speedy deletion rules. GB fan 17:49, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your help.Wikipatrolwatch (talk) 20:48, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey, could you please move

User:Launchballer/Runaway Boys to Runaway Boys? It currently redirects to a band who takes their name from that song. Thank you.--Launchballer 11:50, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done GB fan 12:05, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Bob Rupe for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bob Rupe is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bob Rupe until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. (sorry about the misspelling) Apteva (talk) 01:13, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Susan J. Elliott

I am not sure that the poster really is Susan J. Elliott. I would have expected a lawyer to read what was said more carefully, because no one said that the article was an autobiography. She was advised to read the policy on autobiographies, which also applies to publicist-written articles. I also think that a lawyer would not have bothered to SHOUT IN ALL CAPITALS. Anyway, the IP address is blocked. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:30, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree and have read the same things you have. Just not sure what opening another discussion about the same thing in another spot will do. The Help desk one makes sense since that is where the IP started. The ANI one makes sense since it is an incident that requires admin intervention. I don't understand why we need to start another discussion at User talk:Jimbo Wales GB fan 20:37, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

for moving Aldo Group. Regards, Ground Zero | t 23:01, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit summary by CTF83! Alt [edit]

I get where you're coming from. Even as a double minority, I don't get the offense by that label as it classes our group. I would never get offended at anybody over a word that classes us, then list off other offensive slurs as my response to make a point. That's simply how we class, so I didn't understand what made him break out into slurs. I know he wasn't necessarily calling anybody those terms, but I'm sure if I went to the "black people" article and stated to someone's simple writing 'black' in: "Don't use 'black.' That's rude. What if I went F-word, C-word, H-word," I wouldn't hear the end of it.

I mean, I could very much understand if someone used the f-word and he responded, "Hey, don't use that. What if I used nasty slurs about you? How would you feel?" Heck, I could EVEN understand it if he said, "Listen! don't use 'homosexual.' To me, that's offensive. It's like me using a slur connected to your ethnicity." I mean, did he even know what color this person was? Using that was just the first thing that came to mind despite whether or not it connected to the person in question.

Anti-black behaviors are all over the World Wide Web. I didn't think I had to worry about it here because of stricter rules and higher education levels, but I'm noticing it does and that it's very subtle. The stricter rules have only made it more subtle among established users who aren't trolling IPs. I'm confident I won't get much understanding over the issue. For what it's worth, however, thank you for your clarification on my user talkpage. AmericanDad86 (talk) 12:58, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

You are welcome. GB fan 13:23, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Lithuanian football standings (1922–1930)

Hi, I see you removed the speedy deletion tag I inserted on Lithuanian football standings (1922–1930). I placed it there because individual articles exist on the Lithuanian League from that period (e.g. 1926 LFF Lyga), so it is pointless for the page to exist, and a redirect would do little good seeing as there are 9 different articles it could point to. Thanks. :) --Hockeyben ^{(talk - contribs)} 14:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

When you nominate an article for deletion, you need to explain that rather than putting a tag that doesn't apply. I have deleted it a little out of process. GB fan 21:08, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

ANi Closure

Please can you reverse you silly discussion to close the AN/I regarding the Ip editor and their disruptive editing. This is more than a content dispute, . While that forms part of it, other elements if the comments by myself had been read were Personal attacks by claiming i had a personal dislike of them and disruption of wikipeida. I was asked to provide diffs which i have of their disruption and bad faith. I have done so. You have ignored that and claimed iot is a content dispute and nothing more. It is more than that and can you please reverse your decision as you have not fully understood the complaint being made.Sport and politics (talk) 13:20, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

No, it is a content dispute. The IP wants to add content, you do not want the content. That is a content dispute. There are no actionable personal attacks. I looked at every one of your diffs, the IP adds content and expresses why they feel the content belongs. That is not disruptive. GB fan 13:27, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

I think there is a need to read the actual diffs provided also how being claimed I am only acting in a way i am because I have a personal dislike not an actionable personal attack? That is textbook assumption of bad faith. Sport and politics (talk) 16:03, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

I did read the actual diffs you provided. Bad faith is not a personal attack, commenting on what the IP believes your motives are is not a personal attack. Please use the article talk space to discuss your difference of opinion on the content of the articles. If that fails then refer to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution, to try to resolve the dispute. GB fan 17:53, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Tonkin Corporation

I would be grateful for your assistance with this article. It is currently the target of successful attacks on the original author. Unsubstantiated comments are being added. Comments are defamatory. What is the correct way to handle this in Wikipedia. You seem to have solid knowledge of correct process. (talk) 00:56, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Revdel request

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=White_rice&diff=554693178&oldid=541348214

If you search on the name mentioned without the middle initial, you will see a disambiguation page with the name. --Guy Macon (talk) 05:39, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

•  Done GB fan 10:10, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Daniel Coyne

Why did you erase this page? LORDDT01 (talk) 01:17, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I deleted it because it was an article about a real person, and it did not indicate the importance or significance of the subject. The article said that Daniel Coyne is a local high school band director, with two sources from the Ponaganset High School Music Parents Association. GB fan 01:25, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Wiki HQ Bbb23

Wiki HQ Bbb23 only wants to post bad stuff not good stuff on people. I am teaching social media for philanthropy. I will recommend to philanthropy organizations to stay away from Wiki else their brand and economic value gets destroyed. If Wiki can't create economic value attaching yourselves at the top of folks' and organizatons', then what good societal value are you. Wiki attaches itself at the top of folks' and organizations' Google search saying in technological arrogance and narcissism "our way or the highway'! Out here on Main Street nobody I am talking to likes this at all but you guys. That's the essence of technological arrogance and narcissism in the age. We are very upset at Wiki about this notion and you're not listening to user satisfaction of your existence. This is a classic prescription of becoming non-existent and irrelevant soon by another possibility of a better way. Encyclopedia Britannica 1911 Eleventh Edition Wiki is definitely NOT! I will definitely teach this to my students in my classroom.

I have read your plain and simple guide. The blocked edits added on 4 awards and extensive sourcing references as you Wiki HQ Bbb23 requested of us. Since it looked more truthful and credible plain and simple Wiki HQ Bbb23 got mad and and rejected everything she's actually requested. Is this "plain and simple request then rejection" policy guidance of Wiki HQ now. Rewrite your policy and rename it. Wiki Users are totally confused by Wiki Policies of technological arrogances and narcissism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olivermcgee (talk • contribs) 01:25, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I do not understand your rambling above. You can use the article's talk page to present sources for the changes you think should be made to the article. GB fan 01:31, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Clash of Clans

Can you please move the deleted articles for this subject to my userspace? This is a very notable video game. At the very least it should be a redirect to the parent company Supercell (videogame company). It appears the subject has been salted? Thanks and have a nice weekend. Candleabracadabra (talk) 19:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I am restored and useried the article with all of the history to User:Candleabracadabra/Clash of Clans. You can look and see if there is anything you want to use. GB fan 22:57, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks very much GB fan. I see in the history that you did in fact redirect, but that an unsourced article was recreated. Not much in the history, although there were some earnest attempts at describing the game albeit without any citations. I created a stub of article about it based on a good source at Clash of Clans (videogame) because Clash of Clans is salted. If you can move it to the appropriate title I would appreciate it.

I'm a bit of a purist so I like all the history to be maintained, but I have no idea how difficult this is so I leave it up to you whether you think a history merge is worth doing.

Thanks again for your help. I suspect the subject will be a magnet for fly by editing as it's a very popular game with a young demographic, but it's definitely notable. Probably bears watching and maybe a ban on edits by non registered users might be necessary at some point.. We'll see. Have a great Memorial Day Weekend. Candleabracadabra (talk) 01:17, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I have moved it but still do not think the game is notable. GB fan 01:02, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

User:Shaushka's edits

Hi, could you please take a look at User:Shaushka's edits? I told him/her several times, but Shaushka doesnt use talk page, he/she is reverting or deleting (sources) as he/she wants. It will be helpful to read this discussion. Thanks in advance.--Gomada (talk) 13:11, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

I have used the talk pages. Stop lying. Shaushka (talk) 13:47, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Conversely, you are changing the pages as you want. You, as a Yazidi, could want to be Kurdish but you are in encylopedia, plz remember that. And you cannot identify separate ethnic groups as Kurds.Shaushka (talk) 13:54, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

This is a content dispute and I do not know anything about these subjects so I will be of no help. You can ask for assistance at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Kurdistan. GB fan 18:15, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for your answer. He/she has already involved Edit warring.--Gomada (talk) 18:57, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Stewart Varnado

This page was unnecessarily deleted I would like an explanation as to why68.114.152.148 (talk) 14:54, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

I made a mistake, didn't look at the history close enough. Didn't realize that the article had just been redirected and the redirect deleted. It has since been fixed. GB fan 22:05, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

RfA revert

I'm sure you'll know which one I'm referring to, and thank you. I'm disappointed that the IP decided to sink that low, but am not completely unsurprised. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 13:26, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome GB fan 13:31, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

• Looks like I need to thank you again! Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:50, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
  • You're welcome again. GB fan 14:54, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Re: the IP at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Mattythewhite 2‎, this is now was at WP:DRN. GiantSnowman 14:51, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

I saw it when I was mentioned by Luke but thanks for the heads up. GB fan 14:54, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Removal of Information on Jim O'Rear

I understand the removal of the first section in the O'Rear talk page but you had no cause or justification at all to remove the second section that disputed the self citations and WERE facatually sourced. (Sellpink (talk) 17:54, 2 June 2013 (UTC))

Both of the publications cited in question are published by Bear Manor Media (also available on Amazon) and are valid public sources for citation. Mr. O'Rear is not an author of these books, as the author is clearly stated by the publisher. Again, User SELLPINK is attempting to vandalize the article (On Wikipedia, vandalism is the act of editing the project in a malicious manner that is intentionally disruptive) with malicious intent and has already had malicious, libelous content deleted over this same article. Now it appears that the user SELLPINK wants to start an edit war by readding material that he was clearly told not to readd by you. 98.193.225.142 (talk) 18:46, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

If you believe the sources are not reliable you can ask at the reliable sources noticeboard. GB fan 21:20, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Also Sellpink has not added material that I said not to readd. They are discussing the sources and not saying negative info about a living person. GB fan 21:27, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Alex Andrew page

Dear GB fan, Today I created a scrab about Dr. Alex Andrew, former general director of World organisation of Systems and Cybernetics http://www.wosc.co/.

He is distinguished researcher and made some valid contributions in the field of systems management. The scrab I created was only a preparation for other editors - his researchers fellows. I didn't count on your speedy management, on which I must congratulate you.

Is there an option to undelete the page, and we continue the editing process in a sandbox environment until the page is ready for publishing?

Sincerly Igor Perko — Preceding unsigned comment added by Perko.igorx (talk • contribs) 18:45, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

I have restored the article and moved it to your userspace, you can find it at User:Perko.igorx/Alex Andrew. Let me know when you think it is ready and I will look it over so it doesn't get deleted again. GB fan 18:53, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello

Hiya, I just asked a question over on WP:RED about personal names. As an editor of this guideline if you could help me find an answer I would much appreciate it. Thanks. -- MisterShiney ✉ 18:00, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

From bad IP

Really thanks for assuming bad faith and accusing me for being "sockpuppet of some indefinately blocked user". However, CheckUser will prove different. Now let me explain:

1. Usage od template which is based on fringe theory isn't valid for encyclopedia, no matter of how fine it looks or somebody like it. I gave my proves on talk page and I still haven't seen any valid argument for keeping.
2. In cases like Gutian people, Lullubi, Medes and Template:Kurds there has been numerous of attempts of grouping ancient civilizations under Kurd-related categories or wikiprojects by antiquity frenzy nationalists, but quickely restored by administrators.
3. Yazidism implies for religion of Yazidis according WP:RS [8], not 1990's-neologism Yazdânism. (answer to your backup-question, it was redirected by some unknown IP without explanation [9]).

I know that when anonymous IP is edditing such themes there's 90% probabily of POV-pushing, but there's no need for assuming bad faith and like-a-boss edits if somebody contacted admins and gave reliable sources. When I notice nationalistic playing with ancient period I usually contact serious administrators and expierenced editors like Dougweller, Kansas Bear or Dbachmann. I already contacted Doug days ago but he seem to be busy, so I sent message to KB also few hours ago. My strong advice for you is to consult some of them or religion-related WikiProject before inserting template again. Cheers! --46.239.60.21 (talk) 15:24, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

There isn't much good faith with this editor, but he/she/it is always the first to demand everyone show him good faith. He repeatedly edit wars, can see why anyone would have a pov conflicting with his, and works hard to make sure that any scholar daring to suggest the Kurds' ethnogenesis includes anyone he doesn't approve of, is smeared with clearly derogatory, pejorative, polemic and inflammatory terms like antiquity frenzy. Concepts like "NPOV" seem to go right over his head. This anon account is clearly a bigot who can't stand for other povs to be represented on wikipedia. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 15:30, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Considering Til Eulenspiegel, he forced Kurd-related categories in article Gutian people for three times, and he's speaking about bad and good faith. Give me a break. --46.239.60.21 (talk) 16:57, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

SpaniHard

I have notified them, >User:Moxy< around a month ago; nothing has been donr;Daufer (talk) 00:33, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Follow the directions at WP:SPI. That is the proper venue for reporting a suspected sock puppet, not an individual's talk page. If you don't report to the proper noticeboard don't complain if nothing happens. GB fan 00:44, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

thank you

— Robert Greer (talk) 18:27, 15 June 2013 (UTC)Thank you for deleting User:Robertgreer/to do/ballet/New York City Ballet/Archive/Summer Saratoga Springs and User talk:Robertgreer/to do/ballet/New York City Ballet/Archive/Summer Saratoga Springs. — Robert Greer (talk) 18:27, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

yw GB fan 18:36, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Request

Sorry for the trouble, but could you please restore my user page as it was before deletion? I accidently outed myself on off-wiki website (using a form that did not work as I expected) and therefore thought about starting editing from another account... However, after thinking a while, I realized that I do not care much about privacy issues any longer. Thank you, My very best wishes (talk) 04:33, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

No trouble at all, I have restored all versions if you wantsone gone let me know. GB fan 10:20, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I understand your hint (and this is a good one), but could you please restore one of the latest versions that includes userboxes and texts in "quotation" boxes? Thanks, My very best wishes (talk) 21:08, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure what you would like done. GB fan 22:06, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Unless I am mistaken, version you restored was not the last one. If you could restore four last (most recent prior to deletion) versions of the page, that would help. If not, no problem. Thank you, My very best wishes (talk) 22:14, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

You are right, there were additional revisions. I am not sure why they didn't restore the first time. They are in the history now. GB fan 22:20, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! That is what I needed. My very best wishes (talk) 23:02, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Move Request

Hi, can you please take a look at my request? i also wrote to User_talk:Alborzagros#Gaumata Alborzagros who created the article, but he didnt say anything. I hope you can change the name of article, coz only in english wikipedia, there is such name. Regards.--Gomada (talk) 18:14, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

I have moved the article, there is no reason to have the disambiguation. GB fan 23:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you.--Gomada (talk) 23:21, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

List of bishops of the Episcopal Church in the United States of America

Thanks so much for catching that – I meant to tag the version in my userspace! Whoops! DBD 14:03, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

OK, thought it was a funny tagging. GB fan 14:21, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Mickie James

Hi, last week I was told that I was dictating Mickie James' article, and I am very sorry for what I did, but yesterday Miss X-Factor was doing just that. I don't mean to come across as a big baby or a taddle tale or anything like that but she took to the talk page, which is a good thing, said what she was going to do without anyone agreeing to it, did the edit, and left a note saying not to edit it or they will be reverted. I edited it and she immediately reverted it. Who is she to do all that? Since you showed me my wrongdoings, I just wanted to get your opinion on what is dictating and what isn't before an edit war breaks out. Thanks. Sir Wrestler (talk) 19:27, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Have you tried discussing the edit with her on the article's talk page? If not, the way forward is to discuss it on the article's talk page. If you can not come to an agreement there the next step is to try dispute resolution. A good first step, especially where there are only two editors discussing it is at WP:third opinion. Also I do not see the note saying not to edit it or it will be reverted, can you link to that so I can evaluate what was said? GB fan 20:08, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much. It said, "Don't delete or alter this section, it will be reverted". Click on Mickie James' TNA section to verify. Sir Wrestler (talk) 20:15, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

I saw what you are talking about now. I have removed two hidden notes they are not appropriate unless there is a very strong consensus on the talk page that the sections are perfect and shouldn't be changed and I do not see that. GB fan 20:49, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Again, thank you very much and I will try to take your advice and take to the talk page soon. Sir Wrestler (talk) 21:18, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of G11 process on Gemalto and Safenet

Hi GB Fan, I saw that you deleted my G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion for those pages: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safenet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemalto Please note that I wrote a page called Feitian Technologies, a pure player like those 2 companies listed above in digital security, and an administrator named Jimfbleak(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimfbleak) erased my page with the G11 justification. I told him that my page was written in the same terms as the Vasco Data Security company (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=VASCO_Data_Security_International&action=edit&redlink=1), and he erased this Vasco page, a pure player like Safenet and Gemalto and Feitian (Feitian is number 1 in china and Asia for authentication solutions)with the G11. Please contact Jimfbleak and restore the true justice on wikipedia, because if Feitian and Vasco diserve to be erased with the G11, Gemalto and Safenet should also be erased without any further discussion. The more I learn about Wiki, the more I think its filled with paid lobbyist abusing their Administrator position to grab some bucks... another definition of corruption. Thanks for your reply,NickyLarson29 (talk) 03:47, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

I see you are already discussing this with Jimfbleak and that is the proper course of action. It is not proper to nominate other articles for deletion because the one you wrote was deleted. If you feel they are promotional, you can retag them and I will let another admin decide if they are unambiguously promotional and should be deleted under G11. Just for the record I am not paid by anyone to do any editing on Wikipedia. GB fan 11:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Heya!

Hey GB! How do you do? Thanks for reverting that Vandalism on my talk. Can that be a gift? I think he is a sock-puppet or somewhat. I have no interaction with him/her. Regards. Faizan 08:48, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

I do not see that sa a gift either. Probably is a sockpuppet of someone but I have no idea who. Will watch and see if I can identify sockmaster or if the trouble continues. GB fan 10:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks GB, my regards. Faizan 12:42, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Leave my Frank Buglioni page alone

me and the person who the page is about wrote it so it does not need to be changed in any way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GiordanoBishop (talk • contribs) 18:12, 2 July 2013‎

The page does not belong to you or who the page is about. The page does need to be changed, the text that you keep adding is not appropriate for an encyclopedia article. Encyclopedias present the facts not opinions. Those are opinions and present a specific point of view. We should let the reader decide if Arturo Gatti was great, a fighter full of heart and packed a punch. GB fan 18:18, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

ME AND HIM CREATED IT SO IT DOES BELONG TO HIM, I WILL ALWAYS REVERT BACK TO THE ORIGINAL TEXT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GiordanoBishop (talk • contribs) 18:21, 2 July 2013‎

You are wrong, no one owns any article in wikipedia. You gave up that when you edited the encyclopedia. GB fan 18:36, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Not sure how/why I have this page on my watchlist but I am going to step in and remind users that we need to be civil to each other and will reiterate the point that GB Fan said and that is that editors do not own articles regardless of the number of edits to the page. GordanBishop please also note that articles MUST maintain a Neutral Point of View (it is policy) and conform to Biographies of living persons. -- MisterShiney ✉ 19:50, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I was randomly in Recent Changes and noticed this. I have to agree with MisterShiney here. buffbills7701 12:24, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

you have just changed more information and said "citation needed" but he was the one who wrote it and therefore there are no quotes on the internet because it came from himself, this is just getting ridiculous--GiordanoBishop (talk) 12:21, 3 July 2013 (UTC) now

You really need to step back from this article. You are to closely connected with Frank Buglioni to look at it in an objective manner. The policies here are very clear that the information in an article must be verififable so that others can confirm it is correct if they want to. The information in the article must come from reliable sources. You saying that he made some statement is not a reliable source. As I explained on your talk page, if you have concerns use the article talk page and explain what your concerns are. We shouldn't be having extended conversations here about the article. They should all be consolidated at Talk:Frank Buglioni so there is a permanent record where anyone interested can easily find it. GB fan 13:29, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

And to let you know, I am not done rewriting the article yet. If you want someone else to look at what I have done you can ask for help at WP:Help desk, Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests or Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions to name a few. GB fan 13:36, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Close of Eric Corbett discussion

With that close I am out of here for the day. If anyone objects so be it. GB fan 16:06, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

• I added your sig to it. Hopefully that wasn't too bold. Bbb23 fixed the template, which wasn't closing properly. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 16:16, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing it to both of you. GB fan 21:51, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Hannah Martin Duarte

Hello someone deleted a verifiable notable page for Hannah Martin Duarte. She is a television personality a philanthropist and has many young ladies globally that look up to her and she deserves to have a notable page on Wiki. The vandal who vandalized the Pamela Martin Duarte page along with the Big Rich Texas page where they removed Hannah's wiki link and her as a cast member all together. Hannah is an employee of NBC Universal and hope that you will assist us with the editorial war that seems to have been waged upon her page, her mothers' page and the 2 television shows' pages for which she is a leading cast member. Thank you for your assistance. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fact reporter1 (talk • contribs) 18:35, 7 July 2013‎

You created it and you blanked it. That is why the last version was deleted. You need to address the concerns raised at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Fact reporter before proceeding any further. GB fan 18:58, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Cedar Campus

Hello,

I am an intern at Cedar Campus and part of my responsibilities were to update the previously not great wikipedia page.

I have never written this sort of content before so I was very unclear on the restrictions of the site. I've now read through the introductory page and hope to do it right this time.

I plan to recreate the page with more "encyclopedic" language. I am sorry again for the previous misunderstanding. I hope that the new page will not be up for speedy deletion.

Ellaine54 (talk) 18:50, 8 July 2013 (UTC) Ellaine54

you should not be writing an article about a subject you have close ties to. We discourage editors with a conflict of interest from editing articles where they have one. GB fan 19:07, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

The previous author appeared to be a grade school student that did not give thorough or factual answers.

If I do not, I am not sure who will, I have/had no intent to write it to the non-profit companies liking, simply facts about the company. Most all of the content is pulled from the companies website due to the fact I and others in the office wrote that content. I attempted to make links and citations to those, but they were flagged.

I am at a loss for what to do at this point as I have spent most of the day working to make sure this page goes up with no bias and properly written. I've read through the style page, the citation page, tried to use templates, and am finding the page deleted often. This page is not an advertisement, I tried to model it after the IVCF page, as that is the father non-profit organization. These are non-profit companies that would like for people to be able to search and find answers when they would like them.

If you could offer advice, it would be greatly appreciated. Blessings Ellaine54 (talk) 19:48, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

To begin with you can not pull from here. At the bottom of the site it says that it is copyrighted and we do not allow copyrighted material on Wikipedia. Next, while your intent is not to advertise, you will have a hard time writing about Cedar Campus in an objective manner. You should not be writing the article, someone not associated with them should, if it is notable. That gets to the next point, the way we determine if a subject is notable. The basic criterion for determing notability is significant coverage in reliable sources. Now if you are determined to write the article you can start it at WT:Articles for creation/Cedar Campus. If you submit it there, experienced editors will review your article and determine if it meets our requirements. GB fan 19:58, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Gary Yourofsky

I changed the template transclusion in your comment on Talk:Gary Yourofsky as you had transcluded Fluffernutter's user page onto the talk page, and it had notified everyone who was linked on their user page (like me, having given Fluffy a barnstar). —Tom Morris (talk) 19:01, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I had also seen it and fixed it a different way, but either way works. GB fan 19:11, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

1st Battalion Ulster Defence Regiment

Hi GB. I've noted your reversion at 1st Battalion Ulster Defence Regiment. Would you please explain why - just so I can understand? My thinking is that the page is only different from the live article page by a comma, see 1st Battalion, Ulster Defence Regiment and wouldn't affect any searches if it were gone. I'm seeking education here :). SonofSetanta (talk) 14:05, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

You are trying to WP:CSD|Speedy Delete]] a redirect. All speedy deletions must meet one of the narrowly defined speedy deletion criteria. There are two criteria that pertain specifically to redirects, R2 and R3. R2 does not apply because it only applies if the redirect is in the mainspace and it redirect to a different space. R3 has two pieces and both must be met, recently created and implausible typo. The redirect doesn't meet either one, it was created in 2011, not recent, and it is a plausible typo with the only difference being a comma. There are General criteria also, but none of them apply. If you strongly feel that the redirect should be deleted the only option I see is redirects for discussion. In my experience though if you nominate it for deletion there it will be kept, since it is plausible that someone may type in the name without the comma and redirects are cheap. If you need more information let me know. GB fan 14:32, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

After reading your explanation I accept it all without reservation. There is no point in pursuing redirects for discussion because ultimately the redirect is doing no harm. My logic was simply a tidy one: to remove a page which wasn't being used. Thank you for taking the time and trouble to explain it to me. SonofSetanta (talk) 15:22, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Your welcome GB fan 18:25, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Edit war

Since you warned me about edit warring, can you look at Ashleigh Banfield talk page? Someone is putting rude information there. Thank you. Two kinds of pork (talk), —Preceding undated comment added 00:19, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I have removed the section and removed it from the edit history. Any time there is unsourced negative information about a living person, that is an exemption to the three revert rule. In the future you can remove it and then report to WP:AIV so an online admin can respond. GB fan 00:33, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Sir Henry Stafford

I was disappointed to find a red link on Henry Stafford's name and so looked into the possibility of building up an article on him. However, I see that you recently deleted an article on the grounds that it did not indicate his importance or significance. I have never seen the deleted article and so I cannot judge whether it had any merit. Are you in a position to let me see a copy of the deleted article, so that I can judge for myself whether it does him justice? Maybe I could make a better job of it.

Stafford was the second son of the 1st Duke of Buckingham and is less important than his brother and nephew. His claim to fame is his relatively long, successful marriage to Margaret Beaufort during the minority of her son, the future Henry VII, and his support for the Lancastrian cause, which Margaret espoused, until the end of his life, when he switched his allegiance to the Yorkist cause. He contributed towards the restoration of Edward IV, but died as a result of his battle wounds.

Thank you for any contribution you can make to this discussion. Incidentally, I was spurred to consider writing an article after someone else writing on Margaret's talk page suggested that there should be one. Interest in Stafford has increased as a result of a sympathetic portrayal of him in a BBC historical drama.

LynwoodF (talk) 17:08, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I have undeletd the article and moved it into your userspace, you can find it at User:LynwoodF/Sir Henry Stafford. GB fan 17:15, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your rapid response. The article looks a little thin. I shall see if I can make a better job of it. LynwoodF (talk) 18:09, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

User talk:Archcaster

Hi, you recently deleted User talk:Archcaster as being ‎"user request in own userspace, WP:U1". However, that criterion specifically excludes user talk pages, which this was. Is it possible this was a mistake? Thanks! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 02:07, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes it was a mistake. They had requested a lot of pages and I deleted them as a group. Just missed that the talk page was stuck in the middle. Undeleted. GB fan 02:11, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

E-mail

Hello, GB fan. 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.

--Guy Macon (talk) 20:32, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry I hadn't responded. I see no reason to bother with it since it is 5 years old. GB fan 14:20, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

ok

ok. thanksStrongvibration (talk) 12:47, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Temagami diamond mine

"as there is a source, it is not a blatant hoax". Did you even read my reason for deletion? The source does not support the content nor does it mention a mine. I am from the general area so I would know if it's a hoax or not. No diamond mines are around here. Volcanoguy 21:59, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

If you feel it should be deleted, you can use WP:PROD or WP:AFD. GB fan 22:06, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of page "SlimWare Utilities"

To User: GB fan

This is Wendy Vinca, the author of the page dedicated to the software startup SlimWare Utilities out of Ocean Springs, MS. That page was recently deleted under your notices of …

Expired PROD, concern was: No evidence of notability. The article was written as unambiguous promotion by a spam-only account and is essentially an advertisement.

I'm afraid I did err when nothing the correct copyright for the logo and I didn't correct it in time to avoid the speedy deletion of the file: File:41603 135420033145887 9858 n.jpg

That being said, I was distressed to see that the whole page had been taken down. When first posted, I and a colleague of mine took pains to make sure the page fit the Wikipedia standards. We systematically addressed notices as posted, adding relevant references and internal links such that the notices were removed. We also sought to modify copy so that it did not constitute bias or advertising. In this light, I resent the label "unambiguous promotion" and I really resent the "spam-only" bit. We tried our best to keep the content informative while expressly avoiding the trappings of being essentially an ad.

As for the evidence of notability, well, I don't know what to say there. SlimWare Utilities is a software company; it sells products both free and paid that are highly rated on CNET, Tucows, etc. and there is media coverage of the company as well (so cited.)

I'd like to petition for re-establishment of the page. If that is possible only through estensive revision then so be it. I'll happily address what is viewed as ad-copy and attempt to up the value of the data. There's no doubt that we want to fulfill the requirements of Wikipedia, both under it's philosophical and logistical bannerheads, so I'd like to re-submit if possible. Can I submit to you a new page based on the old? Or can I revive the old page with pending conditions on its continued hosting?

Thanks for your time, Wendy — Preceding unsigned comment added by WendyVinca (talk • contribs) 20:56, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

As a contested Prod, I have restored the article. The article can still be put up for deletion through the WP:AFD process if you do not address the concerns. GB fan 22:49, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Martyr

I have left a message on the martyr page regarding neutrality. HOw do you add secularism into God, and God into atheism? Same goes for martyr, martyr is a religious word, it is not a secular one......... you can not just delete my work, edit it......

here's a copy of the text there too :)

I need help Neutrality. How do you add secularism to word God, and to word martyr??? These words can not be secular. Word martyr is in many religious texts as we can see in the contents section, now just because someone decided to name some people martyr's in some event that happened in time who didn't even die or that did die doesn't make them martyrs, even though we call them. Now this word is used by secular people the word God is used by secular people when they say that God is someone else other than God. This is the same problem with this word. I need help with these trigger happy undo button pushers suggested by automated program that counts bytes??? The word martyr means witness yes, but we do not mean a witness in court here :) , we mean a witness in religious terms here, so there is no room for secularism on this page just as there is no room for athiests on religious pages, and religious people on atheists belief's pages :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeputyBob (talk • contribs) 15:34, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

I know nothing about the article, have never edited it. Please stop reverting. GB fan 15:47, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

yes you know nothing of the article so please stop reverting before you read it, just because you are an administrator doesn't mean you should not read the article. ok??DeputyBob (talk) 16:11, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

I haven't reverted the article. I haven't even edited the article. GB fan 17:22, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Martyr ownership of articles

Mr GBfan, and the whole wikipedia

Please stop assuming ownership of articles as you did at pretty much everything on your page. Behavior such as this is regarded as arrogance, arrogance defined as thinking you know something and you tell yourself you know this, but you really don't know it because you have been taught wrong, yes? This could lead to a very lonely life and you could be blocked from the planet.

Thank you

a human creature living on the planet which is called earth, and it can not be called something else just because wikipedia decides that some other people started calling the planet other names like martyr... ok?? DeputyBob (talk) 16:10, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

I haven't assumed ownership of any article. GB fan 17:25, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

also you asked me to tell show u where u reverted my work... well do you think i just picked a random user :) , ur username was the signature :) ...... also you and the whole wikipedia take ownerships of articles quoting astronomy from books by authors who are vererinarians. yea you should take a good look at what you are doing in your life. leave wikipedia alone, just ask yourself are you lying or telling the truth :) .. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeputyBob (talk • contribs) 20:31, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

So where did I revert Martyr? I have never edited the article. I have never quoted an astronomy book authored by anyone. I am telling the truth. GB fan 22:27, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Sir Henry Stafford

I have left a message on the Sir Henry Stafford page - but as it has now been deleted:

The page for Sir Henry Stafford has been deleted - it is not clear why this is the case. Given his recent depictions in contemporary media (P Gregory's books, particularly The Red Queen, and BBC's The White Queen series), it would be important to have a historically accurate page about Sir Henry Stafford. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lexalot (talk • contribs) 02:38, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I raised the same point a little while ago with GB fan, who kindly sent me the text of the deleted article. It was very thin and I could see why deletion had been requested. Recently I have started to build up a fuller article, but I have hit some problems with inconsistent information and have further research to do. Unfortunately, I am an old man with poor health and this could take me some time. If you or anyone else should wish to create an article independently, I would not feel that you or they were treading on my toes.

I knew little about the first two Dukes of Buckingham and nothing about the rest of the Stafford family. Philippa Gregory and actor Michael Maloney have done a great deal for the reputation of Sir Henry, who comes across as an admirable man.

LynwoodF (talk) 08:31, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

As LynnwoodF said, there wasn't much in the article I deleted, it looked like this when I deleted it. LynwoodF has worked in it and it now has more info. It still needs work before it could be added back as an article. You might be able to collaborate and fix up the article. It is now located here. GB fan 11:03, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Brad Jefferson

Hi, Brad Jefferson was deleted. I would like to restore this page. I think the page is significant because it talks about Animoto and one of the founders. The page for the company already exists, so I figured that a brief bio on the CEO would be good for readers who wish to learn more about Animoto.

Messier83 (talk) 16:43, 8 August 2013 (UTC)Messier83

I did not delete Brad Jefferson, it was deleted by Orangemike. Also Animoto has been deleted by Orangemike. You will need to discuss this with him. Taking a quick look at Animoto it looks like a good deletion. GB fan 16:52, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

"Project for Awesome" Speedy Deletion

You recently deleted my speedy deletion suggestion on the subject page because "the page has content". Maybe I used the wrong template, but my point was that the page HAS NO MORE content than the parent page and is fact a direct copy and paste creating a new page. Is this a criteria for speedy deletion or did I simply misread the criteria list? Thanks - Ckruschke (talk) 15:03, 9 August 2013 (UTC)Ckruschke

You tagged the article as a A1. If an article is to be deleted under the A1 criteria, that means that the article does not have enough content to understand what it is about. Reading through the article, I can understand exactly what it is about, so A1 f\does not apply. Based on what you are saying here, the closest speedy deletion criterion that you are describing is A10. A10 is about articles that duplicate an existing articles. The problem is that A10 has a provision that it has to be recently created, Project for Awesome was created over a year ago, so it is not recent. It would be a problem if it was a direct copy and paste from one article to another, that could be deleted as a copyright violation under G12. I assume from your description above you are talking about Project for Awesome being a copy and paste from John Green (author) since that is the John Green mentioned in Project for Awesome. So for this to be a copy and paste, the text that is in Project for Awesome when it was started 18 June 2012 would have to be the same or close paraphrasing of the text about Project for Awesome in John Green (author) on that date or before. The closest revision would be the last edit on 10 June 2012. Project for Awesome is not even mentioned in that version of John Green (author). So G12 does not apply either. I do not see any valid speedy deletion criterion to delete Project for Awesome, if you feel it should be deleted your only options are either WP:Prod or WP:AFD. There is enough in the article to survive a Prod and this should be discussed prior to deletion, so that narrows your options to one, WP:AFD. To me it looks like there is enough to survive an AFD also. Hope this helps. GB fan 23:00, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks much! Probably too much work for me to have interest in continuing to get rid of it simply because I think its a straight copy. There are many many other pages out there on Wiki that are worse wastes of electrons. Yours - Ckruschke (talk) 19:40, 12 August 2013 (UTC)Ckruschke

Kimberly Ann McAndrew

Hi, Kimberly Ann McAndrew was deleted multiple times and has now been re-created as Kimberly McAndrew. Perhaps you can have a look to see whether it now goes beyond the standard missing-person case. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 07:32, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

I do not believe it gives a claim to significance, but I will let another admin look at the article and decide. GB fan 10:39, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Apparently it is very difficult to take "no" for an answer: Disappearance of Kimberly McAndrew... The current article does look a bit better, though. --Randykitty (talk) 10:06, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, not sure whether perhaps you missed the above post. The article is now at AfD. --Randykitty (talk) 10:06, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

I saw the article, I am looking at the article and the AFD. Thanks for the heads up. GB fan 16:10, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Steve Chiotakis

Dear GBfan,

I'm trying not to get my feelings hurt after you deleted my Wikipedia page, deeming me not important (A7. No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events).

Wondering who made you the arbiter of importance.

I am a drive-time radio host in the second largest market of the country, a former national radio broadcaster (Marketplace) and linked in several other Wikipedia articles (Marketplace and Eastern Orthodox journalists).

Please advise.

Thanks, Steve — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.140.243.225 (talk) 00:05, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

I am sorry if your feelings are hurt, but I did not deem you to be unimportant. The deletion had nothing to do with you, it had to do with the state of article. The article was looked at by another editor and myself we did not believe the article made any claim to importance. The article as it stood when I deleted had no references at all on the article. That is why I deleted the article, not because I thought you to be unimportant. GB fan 12:11, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

GB, no worries. I was kidding about feelings. I figured out later the article needed references. And I shouldn't have written an 'autobiography'. Others have told me that I was linked in other articles, so I went ahead and copied and pasted my bio from the network and station I work for. I'll let someone else write about me, if they deem me worthy. And if not, I shall remain anonymous on Wikipedia. Which is probably a good thing. Thanks for responding and for the work you do. I know it's all volunteer. -Steve — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.91.21.70 (talk) 07:20, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for deleting the one page and I do see the problem with the others, I should never have moved the talk pages themselves into archives, but you live and learn. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 02:06, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

warning box

Hello GB fan. A long time ago, back in 2009, we had a discussion about the Christie Goodwin page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christie_Goodwin Back then you really helped me a lot making sure the page was as it should be. I have added some more info over the years, with the necessary references etc. However, there's still a big warning box on top of the page about the neutrality of the article, which was never removed. That's the warning box from 2009. The neutrality was exactly what you and I made sure I got right, and I believe the article is about as neutral and factual as can be. The box however makes the article look like it's "bad". Is there a way to remove that box? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patrickcusse (talk • contribs) 14:03, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

I had not looked at that article in a long time. The article is nuetral, so I have removed the tag from the top of the article. GB fan 16:09, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.64.118.116 (talk) 10:21, 21 August 2013 (UTC)