User talk:Christopher Connor

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

No RfXs since 20:41, 24 August 2014 (UTC).—cyberbot I NotifyOnline

Christopher Connor 2 (talk · contribs) alternative account

DYK nomination of Michael Grunwald[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Michael Grunwald at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:20, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Michael Grunwald, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Republican Party (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) 11:59, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

AN/I discussion[edit]

Hi Christopher, just a courtesy note to say I have mentioned you in an ANI discussion related to the labiaplasty article. Regards, Andreas JN466 05:59, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

IQRA Promotions[edit]

Hello, thought I'd let you know I de-PRODded IQRA Promotions, because it has a couple of notable artists on the roster and therefore its deletion may not be uncontroversial. However, I agree it is probably a non-notable label/organization, but would like to see the article go through AfD just in case someone with more familiarity has sources (I couldn't find any in a more-than-cursory but less-than-exhaustive search.) If you want to nominate go ahead, otherwise I will. All the best, 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 16:45, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I've nominated it for deletion now. Christopher Connor (talk) 17:31, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Islamophobia[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:Islamophobia has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. USchick (talk) 22:16, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Edward Williams (businessman)[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 Edward Williams (businessman) 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 real person, 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 the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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. YousufMiah (talk) 21:30, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Jewish lawyer stereotype[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 Jewish lawyer stereotype requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person, 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 the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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. YousufMiah (talk) 21:35, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Edward Williams (businessman)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Edward Williams (businessman) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: Non-notable businessperson.

While all 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.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article to address the issues raised. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk.

Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process. If you cannot improve the article within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to improve the article. YousufMiah (talk) 22:43, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jewish lawyer stereotype[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Edward Williams (businessman) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: Non-notable subject.

While all 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.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article to address the issues raised. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk.

Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process. If you cannot improve the article within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to improve the article. YousufMiah (talk) 21:46, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Michael Grunwald[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:03, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

for the personal attack here, touched a nerve have I? YousufMiah (talk) 17:00, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

No personal attack, just a statement of fact that you don't know what you're doing. Christopher Connor (talk) 22:57, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
"You have no understanding of the deletion criteria. You shouldn't be getting involved in anything to do with deletion here." Seems like a personal attack to me. Also you clearly don't understand the definition of fact as well as WP:personal attack, as the statement is clearly opinion not fact. YousufMiah (talk) 23:30, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
In what way does putting speedy tags on two articles with multiple reliable sources show that you do understand the deletion criteria and hence show my assertion isn't fact? Christopher Connor (talk) 20:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Right, so the statement "You shouldn't be getting involved in anything to do with deletion here", is a fact is it? I really hope you're not an English teacher or a lawyer because you would really suck at both if you were. 21:16, 2 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by YousufMiah (talkcontribs)
The fact here, as I've already explained, is that you don't understand the deletion criteria, as evidenced by your attempts to speedy and PROD two well-sourced articles (in response to me nominating for deletion an article you wanted to keep but which was found to be non-notable). Given this, any sensible person would come to the conclusion that you shouldn't get allowed with anything to do with deletion. Christopher Connor (talk) 18:31, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Jew goal[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Jew goal at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Oreo Priest talk 03:42, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jew goal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tweet (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) 09:01, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Jew goal for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jew goal 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/Jew goal 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. Yoninah (talk) 20:59, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Jew goal[edit]

After the various prior concerns that have been raised concerning your editing, I am dismayed that you have created another article about a term containing a snide reference to Jewish people. To be fair, the article itself (putting aside the notability issue) does not itself reflect prejudice on the part of yourself as the author (as opposed to on the part of those who coined or used the soccer term). Nonetheless, I think it would be to everyone's advantage if you didn't continue to focus your edits on this sort of thing. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:52, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

My editing is fine, that article is fine, so I don't see what your point is. You might be offended by it, but that's not my problem. Your assertion that I'm "focusing" on this area is also just wrong, but I doubt you care. Christopher Connor (talk) 22:25, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello Christopher. If the above concern had been expressed by one of the numerous throwaway accounts that have targeted you, I would be tempted to agree with you. However, Newyorkbrad is one of the more thoughtful of Wikipedia's arbitration committee (it's an elected position, fwiw, there's a new election going on at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013), so in this instance I don't think it's helpful for you to dismiss his comment in this way.
You may need to look at accepting that it's a good idea to back off from creating or promoting or being involved in such articles for a while. The Wikipedia community as a whole seems to be rather more negative about them that it used to be. Brad may have been suggesting ways for you to avoid the attentions of that self-described "Torches and pitchforks" mentality. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:44, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Everybody sensible here knows that ArbCom is a joke filled with self-serving power mongers. They're the wiki equivalents of the likes of David Cameron, Tony Blair, Michael Gove, and Nick Clegg, so being a member of it isn't going to make me automatically respect them. It'll more likely have the opposite effect. No doubt Newyorkbrad's a powerful wiki-individual and he wants to use that clout to get rid of me. In any case, it's unlikely I'll stumble across any more material any time soon to make an article of the type that so bothers righteous individuals here. Christopher Connor (talk) 23:42, 16 November 2013 (UTC)