User talk:OldSquiffyBat

Welcome![edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, OldSquiffyBat! Thank you for your contributions. I am Marek69 and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Marek.69 ^talk 13:18, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request of reversal of Speedy Deletion under WP:TNT of Article Preeti Chandrakant[edit]

Dear OldSquiffyBat, :-)

REquest No: 2 What Preeti Chandrakant has done is to be seen and read about in many news papers and magazines in Switzerland, Germany and India. Her work with the Living Works of Art is as seminal as the work of some of the artists mentioned. Even if she is not that well known, the call for the first purchaser of a Living Work of Art, and the solid conceptual premise underlying this work is a first in the world of conceptual art, has been spoken about not only at the India Art Fair, but before that at the Art Basel.

I do hope you will reconsider this decision. Also, what are the criteria for a work to be added to the list? Is this a list of American and European artists only? Is it only for prize winners? Is it for truly cutting edge work that pushes the boundaries of what is seen as art? If so, this seminal work could easily find a place there.

There are some artists in the notable conceptual artists list who are certainly less 'conceptual' than Preeti Chandrakant. For example Manav Gupta.

Also, why do you suggest that the Wiki article on this respected artist be removed when there are press articles in Switzerland, Germany and India, as well as the odd article in America to back the statements. I would be more than happy to provide you with every article mentioned.

I request you to reconsider your decision and to add the Living Works of Art to the list.

Thanks in advance for your answer.

Regards,

--Neocreator (talk) 13:34, 11 April 2020 (UTC) NeoCreator[reply]

Falklands War[edit]

I'm sure you think your edit was adding much needed material but I am afraid it was not. Let me illustrate that with a simple example. Caspar Weinnberger gave great materiel aid to the British, including AIM-9L Sidewinders and even the offer of the loan of an aircraft carrier. Do we include Margaret Thatcher's view that Caspar Weinberger was a great friend of Great Britain and that he received a knighthood? This sort of information is tangential to the topic. We're trying to write an encyclopedia not a detailed treatise on the Falklands War. If we added everything that someone has thought of as important the article would be unmanageable.

May I suggest you read WP:BRD. Your revert to restore your edit was what we refer to as edit warring, we have a policy WP:3RR that an editor who continues to revert without discussing their edit may be blocked from editing.

Please note that I have taken the time to write a personal message, giving you help and advice. I removed your edit for a very good reason; one that I enunciated with an informative edit summary. Wikipedia can be a bit daunting when you first start, so rather than simply reverting try asking a more experienced editor for an explanation or for help and advice.

Regards, Wee Curry Monster talk 19:49, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Van Alen Building[edit]

Hello. I question your removal of sentences in the lead. All of the statements are supported by the citations given in the body of the article, and it is not a requirement for the lead to be specifically cited. Architecture writers have been generally favourable towards the building; I can merely reflect what the sources say. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 17:06, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. But an article ought not to read like an advert which this one did because of those sentences. It reads better now without that material. OldSquiffyBat (talk) 10:22, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 4[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Pastygate, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Commentator (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:48, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 28[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Corrèze's 1st Constituency, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Limousin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:53, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012[edit]

Hello, I'm Benzband. I wanted to let you know that another editor undid your edit to Pussy Riot, because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! benzband (talk) 16:20, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to see what stalinism has to do with the page at all. Could you explain why you think it should be put there? Countered (talk) 21:47, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi OldSquiffyBat. Just to let you know I have reported you at WP:AIV. Formerip (talk) 21:56, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OldSquiffyBat, consider yourself duly warned. Deliberate attempts to compromise the integrity of the encyclopedia, such as this edit, are unacceptable; any more and you will be blocked without further notice. Please stick to constructive editing in the future as you have done in the past, and stay clear of topics you feel too strongly about. Thank you. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 00:32, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear OldSquiffyBat, :-)

What Preeti Chandrakant has done is to be seen and read about in many news papers and magazines in Switzerland, Germany and India. Her work with the Living Works of Art is as seminal as the work of some of the artists mentioned. Even if she is not that well known, the call for the first purchaser of a Living Work of Art, and the solid conceptual premise underlying this work is a first in the world of conceptual art, has been spoken about not only at the India Art Fair, but before that at the Art Basel.

I do hope you will reconsider this decision. Also, what are the criteria for a work to be added to the list? Is this a list of American and European artists only? Is it only for prize winners? Is it for truly cutting edge work that pushes the boundaries of what is seen as art? If so, this seminal work could easily find a place there.

There are some artists in the notable conceptual artists list who are certainly less 'conceptual' than Preeti Chandrakant. For example Manav Gupta.

Also, why do you suggest that the Wiki article on this respected artist be removed when there are press articles in Switzerland, Germany and India, as well as the odd article in America to back the statements. I would be more than happy to provide you with every article mentioned.

I request you to reconsider your decision and to add the Living Works of Art to the list.

Thanks in advance for your answer.

Regards,

NeoCreator

This does not belong on Wikipedia.[edit]

Proposed deletion of Pasty tax[edit]

The article Pasty Tax has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

If every news item in British politics had its own wikipedia article, it would be overflowing.

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]