User talk:TheGreenPhantom

TheGreenPhantom, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]

Hi TheGreenPhantom! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Nathan2055 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:16, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Acacia[edit]

Please consider adding to the existing Acacia article rather than creating multiple stubs on its subgenus. In my opinion, if there are nothing else to say about these stubs they will be merged with the main article anyways. So why the trouble? (in my opinion) Kinkreet^{~♥moshi moshi♥~} 01:18, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to get them all listed by area. TheGreenPhantom talk 01:21, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Rubber ninja[edit]

A tag has been placed on Rubber ninja, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Unremarkable page for certain toys

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 02:42, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Zombie Kit[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page that you created was tagged as a test page and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Uberaccount (talk) 03:05, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Tribe of Frog[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Tribe of Frog 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, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Uberaccount (talk) 03:09, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

April 2013[edit]

Please do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. Uberaccount (talk) 03:12, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 03:19, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

TheGreenPhantom (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am not sure what you mean. I haven't created any pages that attack anything. What are you talking about?

Accept reason:

My apologies for misunderstanding - I have unblocked you with an appropriate comment in the block log. But please be aware that the term "Jewcake" can have a derogatory meaning, and as far as I can see it is not generally used in English as a notable cookery term (even if there is a Norwegian use of a similar term). I would recommend against recreating a new article with that name or on that topic. Instead, how about spending a bit of time expanding all those one-line stubs you have created? Anyway, sorry again for the block - I should have spoken to you about it first. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:21, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing admin - check the most recent deleted article. It might not have been a personal attack (though that is not the reason for the block), but see if you think it was offensive. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 05:37, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Basically a short bit of no:Jødekake with a reference to an English language source, with a link to an 1885 cookbook. Assuming good faith, I don't find it in the least bit offensive; I'm not sure it needs its own article in English, anymore than the "Plebeian Gingerbread" on the next page of that cookbook. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 07:17, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - My apologies if the article on Jewcakes caused any offense. I'll try to lengthen the article and get some better sourcing for it if someone can unblock me please. TheGreenPhantom talk 10:21, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking admin contacted. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 10:58, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think the issue now is that the last 4 or so articles you have created are inappropriate for an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a cookbook, nor is it a listing of nightclubs. Nor is it a listing fictional requirements in case of zombie attacks. Nor is it to allow you to define a neologism related to ninja's. I have questions enough about the botanical creations, let alone this type of crap. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:59, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies if they offend, or are deemed negative in some way, but all of those articles were selected for practice from the article request list - [1] (Other and G-M categories). I was picking the funnies. If those articles are inappropriate for inclusion, then I suggest someone should keep a better eye on that list. I thought they'd all be perfectly valid, if a little whimsical. TheGreenPhantom talk 12:56, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article request list has not been pre-approved as valid articles. The first thing someone should do when taking one and considering creating it is to check whether it meets the appropriate Wikipedia notability guidelines and can be supported by reliable sources - basically, if you want to work from that list, it's up to you to apply the "better eye". -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:28, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for attempting to re-create the same articles that NOT creating them was something agreed to prior to unblocking. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 13:57, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

TheGreenPhantom (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My apologies, I am not quite sure I understand the argument. I was "advised" but hadn't realized that had been "agreed". I am not sure why any of these articles is unsuitable for inclusion. Especially Tribe of Frog, I'm a big fan of their work. They are a major creative development in Bristol. I can agree to not re-create Jewcake if you insist but would like Tribe of Frog restored though, if possible. Please.

Decline reason:

Per SPI linked below. — Daniel Case (talk) 15:47, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Before we act on your request, can you read the general notability guidelines and explain, if possible, how the articles you propose to create meet them? Daniel Case (talk) 15:15, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sock[edit]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Paul Bedson Dougweller (talk) 15:42, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]