User talk:Sperezlaw

Welcome!

Hello, Sperezlaw, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Marvel milne, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Wperdue (talk) 01:18, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Marvel milne[edit]

A tag has been placed on Marvel milne requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Wperdue (talk) 01:18, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

June 2009[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Phil Spector. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Dr.K. logos 21:42, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are reverting against consensus[edit]

You are currently edit-warring and reverting three editors who don't agree with you on Phil Spector. Please use the talk page to discuss your edits with the other editors. Failing to do that you will be reported at WP:ANI/3RR and you will be blocked. Thank you. Dr.K. logos 22:12, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule at Phil Spector. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 00:19, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've also blocked User:Nj.sexy (talk · contribs). Please read WP:SOCK and stick to one account. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 00:23, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Spector[edit]

Please take this to the talk page; recent events do not override his previous notability. Revert again without consensus, and you're blocked. Your choice. Rodhull andemu 00:02, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 55 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for I told you to take it to the Talk page to achieve consensus; you didn't. Your reference to Enola Gay is irrelevant per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. consensus is an important policy here, as are WP:BLP and WP:UNDUE. You seem to be unaware of these, but you now have a chance to review them, and learn.. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. Rodhull andemu 00:09, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically, on Spector, he is a music producer. This is why he is famous. Alas he is now also a murderer. See Carlo Gesualdo for a comparable case from antiquity. I first heard of Spector in 1963. And you? Rothorpe (talk) 00:15, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, sorry Rothorpe, that is NOT why he is famous. Spector is a music producer but he only became famous with the general public when he became a celebrity murderer - before that, the only people who knew him were people associated with the music industry. About the only thing you could say is that he was "famous" within the music community, but once you start doing that, just about anybody is famous within their own little community - you're probably famous amongst your friends, and I'm famous amongst my friends, but neither one of us are truly famous. I mean, I'm 50 years old and grew up with the Beatles and I never knew of Spector must less the "wall of sound" - I first heard that phrase when Spector popped up on the evening news for murder. LOL.

Phil Spector again[edit]

I am not going to tolerate any further imbalanced editing from you. Spector was a notable record producer way before his murder conviction, and that is a matter of documented history. It is irrelevant for our purposes that he may have become more widely-known because of that conviction; fame is not notability. It remains that his musical career was notable enough from 1962 - 1972 to validate his article. Compare with O. J. Simpson, but any more attempts from you to unbalance that article, particularly its lead, without making cogent arguments on its talk page, and you are out of here. End Of. Rodhull andemu 00:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

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

Wperdue (talk) 21:50, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note from an uninvolved admin here[edit]

You seem to be having problems (a fixation maybe) with Phil Spector. The reason nobody likes your edit is that Spector would have had a wikipedia article without the murder conviction. You seem to be trying to reduce his life accomplishment to the murder. He was notable without the murder conviction.

On a related note, I urge you to try to work more effectively with others, accepting their points of view rather than trying to enforce your own. We work on consensus here - which you seem to be ignoring. If you continue, you will likely be indefinitely blocked.

I hope this helps. Toddst1 (talk) 21:54, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]