User talk:SuperMarioMan

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

Your request for adminship[edit]

Hi SuperMarioMan, I have closed your request for adminship as successful. Congratulations on your unanimously supported candidacy! As always, the administrators' reading list is worth a read and the new admin school is available if you feel that you might require some practice with the tools in a safe environment before applying them for main use. Good luck with your adminship! Acalamari 22:48, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Congrats on your RfA[edit]

Great job and well done! ///EuroCarGT 00:14, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Congrats on your RFA! Here's your shirt Face-smile.svg! ///EuroCarGT 22:51, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations! --j⚛e deckertalk 00:24, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Congrats!--v/r - TP 00:43, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Congrats fellow March 2014 classmate. -- TLSuda (talk) 03:12, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
My condolences on becoming an sysop. Mkdwtalk 04:04, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Well done! I don't think you will need any advice, like which end of the mop to hold, but if you do, just ask. JohnCD (talk) 10:12, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Ooh, didn't know you'd gone for this. Obviously I would have supported, but it doesn't look like you needed it anyway. Congrats! Bob talk 13:06, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Congratulations! Epicgenius (talk) 13:12, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • 100% support is impressive, the only thing that's a shame is that you're not also a member of the 100 club. Good luck! Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:22, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

My thanks to you all (not least my two excellent nominators!), and to all those who gave their support at the RfA. In the end, it wasn't nearly as brutal as I'd been expecting. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 05:19, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Making Policy Behind Closed Doors[edit]

An edit I made on 24 November 2010 to Alasdair Roberts (academic) has been removed on 3 March 2014‎ with the edit summary No evidence that it wasn't a _letter_ by Roberts, and little evidence it was actually published in the Globe & Mail and again on 9 March 2014 (after I reveted this removal) with the following edit summary There is no evidence that it was published; considering it is a probably BLP violation, it goes. I objected to this on WikiProject Canada, and even though the page has gotten many more views than usual since, no one has has stepped in to revert the revert. I believe Wikipedia still accepts references that aren’t online? – am I wrong?

May I ask that you reply on my own talkpage. Thanks in advance. XOttawahitech (talk) 15:10, 10 March 2014 (UTC)


This stat is interesting, there must be some external links to the users page...--kelapstick(bainuu) 19:35, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Possibly from Facebook? I see that the page has been linked there: [1]. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 13:47, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! A gift from fellow Wikipedians.[edit]

You have been selected to receive a merchandise giveaway. We last contacted you on April 3, 2014. Please send us a message if you would like to claim your shirt. --JMatthews (WMF) (talk) 07:31, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[edit]

I would have blocked for far longer considering the vandalism at the teahouse before they got around to harassing you.--Mark Miller (talk) 22:30, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

  • I would say that 31 hours is sufficient, given that the IP address had no prior history of disruption and all the edits were made in quick succession. Wikipedia:Blocking policy#Duration of blocks states that "incidents of disruptive behavior typically result in blocks of a day or two". SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 23:27, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I can see how that would work however, (and this isn't really an argument to get a longer block) since the IP shows nothing but pure vandalism I would have opted for two weeks to a month. But thanks for the 31 hours as it was well deserved and is not a punishment but purely preventative.--Mark Miller (talk) 23:41, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Jerry Pepsi[edit]

Very nice job recognizing JP as the latest Otto4711 sock. Coincidentally, just a week or so ago I was wondering why we hadn't seen a new sock lately. Well done. BMK (talk) 10:55, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Incidentally, I didn't realize you were an admin now, congrats on that. BMK (talk) 10:56, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks, and no problem. The first thing that struck me about the user was the unusually hostile nature of their reverts, and the more I read of their contributions history (and made the connection to the Harley Hudson (talk · contribs) sockpuppet), the more I suspected foul play. The tone of their comments on the investigation page screams of a sockpuppet who has just been found out – it's just very regrettable that they were able to make in excess of 3,200 edits over the course of more than a year before they were finally stopped. From now on, I'll be keeping a close eye on JP/Otto4711's favourite pages. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 15:56, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes, I've marked a bunch of his favorite articles for my watchlist - I'm not sure why I hadn't done that before, since I've been following Otto's socks for years now. BMK (talk) 16:51, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Ha, yes, I came here also to say well done, well done! PS, mind your US spelling (it's "favorite"); I'm sure you know that no one likes to see some smart Brit with an admin tool, least of all that f***ing Yankee BMK. Drmies (talk) 00:33, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

"Dear Sir"[edit]

Dear Sir, You have wiped out my addition to the Jenkins House article. Thanks for fixing the photos. Anyway, I would like to learn to create acceptable content to add to this article. I have lived in the house since 1986. I was simply referencing changes that my wife and I have made and continuing the history of ownership. The information about the previous owners and their children is not referenced. They are alive too I think, at least their children certainly are. The information about the Browns and their children is not sourced according to Wikipedia standards as I am starting to understand them.

Also, the fact that I was instrumental in getting this listing on the National Register as Village Mayor and then Town Supervisor is on the record. Do I scan in copies of documents that I signed and correspondence I received when I was Mayor?

Really, I don't care if our names are in there but I would like to explain that what you see in the 2009 photo posted there was not created by the Brown's. We have cared for and improved this house much since the Brown's sold it to us in 1986. They are still getting credit for all our our talent and work the way it is written.

Also, I would like to add links to documents from NR and NYS pertaining to the listing. The references that are there now don't work well if at all.

The first time you deleted my content I thought that I had done it by mistake and undid it. No intention to violate policy, sorry. Thanks for fixing the photos.

Now how do we fix it so that the Brown's are not getting credit for the current restoration work that is underway? You can see in my 2013 Iphone photo :-)

If you are willing to help me please respond on my page. Regards, Larry (LJOConnor (talk) 23:25, 30 April 2014 (UTC))

Continued Discussion.

Thank you for your response on my page. Traveling most of this month and will not have time to go back into my records for the State and National Register projects near-term. Do you want me to prove that I was Village Mayor, Town Supervisor and that I supported a grant project in 1979? Do you want a copy of our deed proving that we are the owners of record for the property so that we have authority to speak about factual things? Do I need to write a paper on the work, provide references and then reference it in somehow?

How can we provide references that give my wife credit for the results shown in the 2009 photo? The photo was taken 37 years after the work referenced in the article. The Brown's 1972 'restoration' was a response to a 1971 fire at the property that destroyed the "Grey Barn" that sat in the yard behind the house. The destruction of the Grey Barn and the back half of the house in 1971 was the genesis of the 'reconstruction' project.

My wife and I have spent nearly thirty years being sensitive to Department of Interior Standards in making this property more historically correct. How can we reference all of that work without you considering it to be un-referenced narrative?

The information about the Brown's and their children seems along the same vein, even more personal than what I had added. The personal references that I added related to the work that my wife, my son and I have done on this historic property - factual information about what has happened giving credit where credit is due. Actually more appropriate than the info about the Brown's that you have allowed.

I want to learn and appreciate your assistance. Regards, Larry LJOConnor (talk) 17:21, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Dear SMM/Admin: The edit you just made to the page for my National Register Historic property is instructive. Thank you. "Just the facts, ma'am."

I'll be on the road much of the next month and will thoughtfully assemble some references for uploading. Before doing so I should use the sandbox and somehow confer with someone about the appropriateness before posting? Thanks for your help to a newbie. One night last month I noted that whenever I add a photo on Facebook taken at my home it comes up linked to "Jenkins House". Following this link people would find out about the Browns and what they did forty years ago. Kind of an odd disconnect. I saw the word "edit" on the page and went at it without any instruction. Oh well.

Thanks again for your patience and fixing the photos! Ciao, Larry LJOConnor (talk) 12:53, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Circuit Dreamer topic ban violation[edit]

You left a warning on Circuit dreamer's talk page after recent violations of his ban on editing electronics-related articles. I am afraid he is continuing to violate the ban 1, 2, 3. His current edits are inoffensive, but my feeling is that without further action he will be back to his previous disruptive editing soon. --ChetvornoTALK 07:31, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

A cookie for you![edit]

Choco chip cookie.png Thanks for catching the Sinebot/Huggle goof [2] <3 ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ Talk ♪ ߷ ♀ Contribs ♀ 13:01, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Edit Summary Delete[edit]

Since you blocked the user, would you mind removing the offending edit summaries under WP:CRD's #2? Thanks. Tutelary (talk) 02:10, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you![edit]

thanks for your sweet mop skillz! -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:44, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


I have reverted your change on the glacier caption because mine is correct. If you look at the definition of glacier on it's Wikipedia page (read the first two sentences), it says a glacier is made up of both snow and ice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yo8088 (talkcontribs) 16:58, 21 May 2014 (UTC)


Another one needs blocking. I've reverted their edits. BMK (talk) 01:30, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Stop reverting my edit[edit]

Why do you hate me? Before the criteria came into effect I signed up for AfC. Stop undoing my edits to the participants page, I've done my share of article reviewing Fremantle99 (talk) 05:09, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't hate you. Once you've made another 400 mainspace edits, feel free to re-add yourself. I acknowledge your previous contributions; however, there is no clause, as I far as I know, that permits AfC veterans to be grandfathered into the list without being subject to the same criteria. By the way, I've gone through the page history and it seems that your username was never on the list in the first place – it isn't the case that someone removed you. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 12:44, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Note that this user has been reverting me reinstate his unauthorized reviews of articles [3] [4]. Jackmcbarn (talk) 14:12, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
I have had 400 mainspace edits undeleted, and all reviews are perfectly legitimate Jackmcbarn (talk · contribs) Fremantle99 (talk) 07:18, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
The edit counter tells a different story. At the time of writing, you have 117 undeleted article edits. (A search of your deleted contributions yields 42 deleted.) SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 13:09, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
The same page tells me I have 417 "live" edits, where do you get 117 from? Fremantle99 (talk) 08:17, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
See the red portion of the piechart, labelled "Main" (i.e., "mainspace"). It shows that 123 of your 419 undeleted edits (29%) are to the article namespace. The other 296 (71%) are distributed among other namespaces. Note that the edit counter is updated in real time, with each new edit that is made. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 11:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)


Hello, I have recently noticed, thanks to a popup explaining my AFCH has been disabled that somebody had been removing my name from the AFC Participants list. After tracing my removal to you I decided to add myself. Sure enough, less than 12 hours later I had been disabled again, thanks to you. So I added myself back, and you deleted it again. Trying to see whether your edits were within good faith, or whether you were deliberately ruining the editing process for me, I tested you by adding myself to the Wikipedia Admin category, and see whether you would go out of your way to edit my talk page to remove me from my category, a harmless move which does not grant me Administrator rights. Sure enough, you did. Could I please have you look at WP:WIKIHOUND and give me a decent explanation for such outrageous actions. This message also includes Jackmcbarn (talk · contribs) Fremantle99 (talk) 07:16, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

My "overriding reason" was "fixing unambiguous errors" (WP:WIKIHOUNDING). In what way is the project served by allowing false categorisation? Categories such as Administrators exist partly to help non-administrators – imagine the confusion that would be caused if User:ZzZz were to require assistance and, having just registered and being unfamiliar with how Wikipedia works, were to consult the administrator category, find (non-administrator) User:AaAa at the top of the list, post a request on their talk page, and only later see that they have been misled. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 13:09, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

I was going to add more to the article![edit]

okay? --Hookcross23 (talk) 15:37, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know my edit count...[edit]

Thanks for calculating my edit count and informing me. I was pretty sure I was short of the 500, but that I might have been close enough to qualify for an exemption. At 160, though, I'm not even close, and as you can tell, I lack the ____ (put in your favorite non-judgmental word relating to experience or lack therefore) to even know how many qualifying edits I have or even what a qualifying edit might be. I see something of a chicken-egg problem, though. I am neither terribly motivated by the notion of edit-count glory nor participating in the contest as such -- they seem like good things, but I'm more interested in learning how to efficiently review articles and it looked like the tool associated with this contest was a good way to learn. However, if I've only created 160 edits in the past 7 (8? 9?) years, I estimate it will be 2028 or so before I would qualify to use the tool! :) Do you have any suggestions for how I can learn to utilize some appropriate productivity tool before I have achieved the necessary 500? And if you're the wrong person to ask, feel free to point me to a better person. Thanks in advance, Dictioneer (talk) 13:49, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by a "productivity tool". I see that you've already created about a dozen well-sourced biographical articles, however. To increase your edit count, why not write articles about other notable people? Perhaps you could re-visit one of your existing creations with the aim of having it promoted to Good Article status. Or, how about adding other, similar articles to your watchlist and making edits to those?

The quickest path to 500 article edits may be to get involved with vandalism reversion, regularly checking the recent changes list. You'll find many revert-worthy edits at the following links:,, You can use the Twinkle tool to semi-automate the reverting process – activate it at your user preferences.

If, on the other hand, you prefer quality over quantity when it comes to making edits, Peer review or the Guild of Copy Editors may appeal to you. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 23:33, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

You appear to have noticed that, as Haley Joel Osment said, "I see (and edit) dead people." In addition to avoiding WP:BLP issues, I prefer it if they did most of their work before 1923, as copyright issues are also a pain. However, I'd like to branch out a bit, so I thought I'd volunteer to help reduce the edit backlog. The last time I tried it, late Feb / early March 2013, I did a binge of new article patrolling but found it time-consuming and tedious (more tedious than time-consuming, I suppose, but it felt like lots of time was being consumed for articles I didn't really care much about). I'd somehow drawn the (apparently erroneous) conclusion that signing up for this backlog drive would give me access to a script tool that would automate the review process, hence your recent revert of my signing up due to my not being qualified.

In a nutshell: I'd like to become more of an all-rounder, but I find the policy learning-curve quite steep for many of the review processes and the drama involved in editing living subjects isn't really to my taste. The vandalism-patrol sounds like a good alternate direction: thanks for that suggestion, I'll give it a try. Best wishes for your own administrative work, Dictioneer (talk) 00:24, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


Hey thanks man for letting me know about my image(Kratos) I just took from Google Image please give me example of about copyrights etc. of an img. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 08:37, 12 June 2014 (UTC)


Hello sir. I noticed that you removed my name from AfC participants list. May I know the reason please? I have already 1000+ edits and well aware about review policies. Thank you A.Minkowiski _Lets t@lk 15:08, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Only 259 of your edits are to articles. For AfC reviewing, the minimum requirement is 500 article edits. Another requirement is that your account be at least 90 days old. You registered yours on 6th April, which is just over two months ago. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 18:01, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Esmond Shahonya[edit]

Here's another one: Robert Alai. (talk) 19:20, 18 June 2014 (UTC)


As the last person to delete it I wanted to inform you that the TempZone page was recreated once again (the third time) so it may need to be salted. The user is not responding to posts on their talk page or the article's talk page. 331dot (talk) 18:42, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

I see that someone else has beaten me to both those things. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 20:01, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Polish Information and Foreign Investment Agency[edit]

Hi, just a heads up that I restored Polish Information and Foreign Investment Agency. I looked over the content and think it's fine for inclusion. Doing so erased your salting, I'm not sure if you want to turn it into semi-protection. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 02:49, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

I think that semi-protection would be premature in the absence of evidence of further sockpuppetry on that article. In any case, I won't be applying it; the page is no longer on my watchlist. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 03:02, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
@Legoktm: feel free to restore Marion Vernese Williams as well if you consider the content appropriate and wish to take responsibility for it. My hands are tied in enforcing CSD G5 and WP:BLOCKEVASION under these circumstances. From now on, whenever I encounter WP:DUCK situations involving this user, I'll simply block the sockpuppets, file the SPI report for CheckUser attention and allow others to deal with the revert/deletion backlash. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 03:50, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

CSSG page deletion[edit]

Hello SuperMarioMan,

can you please explain why you deleted the CSSG wikipedia page? Unambiguous advertising or promotion, seems somewhat an irrelevant argument as we are a Charity and by that definition do not make any profit! Also, I have only updated an already existing page- the earlier page had existed for the last 3 years and there were no problems. This is a good cause, there is no reason to interfere. I am in India, it's horribly hot, I'm working for no money, life's hard enough- could you please restore the page?!

Many thanks, Alexandra

A.hotter (talk) 13:13, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

@A.hotter: I'm sorry, and I have no doubt that CSSG's mission is honorable, but from a policy viewpoint it makes no difference whether your organisation is commercial or not. Wikipedia user pages are intended to facilitate interactions between users and thereby assist in the editing of articles; they are not vehicles for promoting individuals, organisations or anything else. Wikipedia is not free webhosting. You may be interested in pursuing one or more of the alternative outlets listed at WP:OUTLETDIR. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 16:24, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply, what parts in particular did you have issues with? The thing is I need a site, so I'll change whatever is necessary. All the charities I know and just typed into google have wikipedia pages. What is the difference? In fact you will find almost every bigger organisation 'promoting' their cause on wikipedia! Please let me know how we can resolve this? Many thanks, Alex A.hotter (talk) 17:06, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

@A.hotter: In response to your first question: the user page was promotional in both tone and structure. Statements like "... has successfully transformed the lives of numerous underprivileged individuals by providing opportunities for professional as well as personal growth" are heavily biased, and sections such as "Ethos", "Vision and Mission" and "Future Events" seem much better suited to a company website.

By "Wikipedia pages", are you referring to user pages or articles? If you're thinking of writing an article on CSSG, there are two very important points to remember: the text must be neutrally written (i.e., it must not promote), and the subject of the article must be notable (as determined by the existence of coverage in reliable, independent sources). Has the work of CSSG been documented in any newspapers or on any reliable, third-party websites? I refer you to the guideline page Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies).

When there is a sufficient level of secondary-source coverage for a given subject, that subject becomes acceptable for inclusion on Wikipedia and may be given an article. Articles on other charities that you see here exist only because the Wikipedia community has deemed those charities to be noteworthy, according to the guideline.

Please note that Wikipedia discourages editing of topics in which you have a personal or professional conflict of interest. This does not mean that you must not write about CSSG, but be aware that having a COI makes the task of writing neutrally considerably more difficult.

If you register your email address, I'll be able to send you a copy of the text of the deleted user page for you to work on. Please let me know if you'd like me to do this. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 21:39, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi SuperMarioMan,

I have just registered my e-mail address, would be great if you could send me the text. I will work it over according to the guidelines- thank you. Is there any possibility I can have the old page restored (before I made any changes?)?! I had updated the CSSG page as a favour to the charity but that has backfired badly. Thanks, Alex A.hotter (talk) 03:08, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

@A.hotter: I am unable to email you via the interface; could you please check your user preferences and ensure that your address is confirmed and the email function enabled?

I would prefer not to restore any version of the page to Wikipedia itself, since even the initial edits were excessively promotional. However, I could easily email the text of the earlier version in addition to that of the version as edited by you, which would at least allow you to compare and contrast. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 03:55, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi SuperMarioMan, I have enabled my e-mail address now, would be great if you could send me the text. I have been blocked for editing yesterday (sth to do with my IP address) -what a nightmare! Here's the thing, I am volunteering in India, teaching children in slums and I have also worked with CSSG for some time, however the initial wiki page was not done by me and I'm in a very bad situation now, being responsible for the deletion. If you could restore the old wikipedia page just for a couple of weeks, whilst I find the time to put together an article according to all guidelines. You can put the it on a watchlist or so and if I haven't changed it in a month's time you can delete it again? Does that sound like sth you could do? You would really help m e out here. Thanks, Alex (talk) 06:51, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Help in creating new wiki page[edit]

Hello there! Can i ask you something? Sir how can i add or create new article here at wikipedia? Thanks! LastFlight14 (talk) 15:42, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for helping to maintain the Teahouse![edit]

Teahouse Host Badge Teahouse Host Badge
Awarded to hosts at the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Experienced editors with this badge have committed to welcoming guests, helping new editors, and upholding the standards of the Teahouse by giving friendly and patient guidance—at least for a time.

Hosts illuminate the path for new Wikipedians, like Tōrō in a Teahouse garden.

Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges
I used to be more diligent about keeping track of new hosts, but I appreciate you keeping an eye on things at the Teahouse and being straightforward but delicate about the expectations we have for hosting. Thanks very much!
I, JethroBT drop me a line 17:54, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

?!? lost all my info[edit]

My user page was delete or something saying I trying to use wiki as a web host ?! When in fact is is just a bio page with info there should not be anything else — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaVillain666999 (talkcontribs) 08:43, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

@DaVillain666999: Wikipedia user pages are intended to facilitate interactions between users. They aid the editing of articles; they are not platforms for promoting individuals, organisations or anything else. Wikipedia is not free webhosting.

That said, if you'd like me to email you a copy of the deleted text, please let me know. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 09:59, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes if you can send my bio to Also if you could help me threw the steps of making a page or article I would still like a page about "Da Villain" that can be edited and updated by people — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

@SuperMarioMan um can you send it or respond back maybe ?

Hi Mario,

I have had both of the CQ Wright files deleted because i did not reference the sources. revised copies with references are available for upload. what is the correct process? thank you wrightachris1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrightachris1 (talkcontribs) 13:27, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Confused! Portal:Current events/Sports/Sidebar[edit]

Hi SuperMarioMan, I'm really confused why anyone let alone an admin would revert such blatant vandalism back to the version with the advert for an Escort service?

KylieTastic (talk) 14:54, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

  • Never mind, I see you noticed and have deleted the content. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 14:56, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
    • It was a misclick – how embarrassing! I'm really very sorry about that. Sometimes I wish that there was a "Reverse my Rollback" option in the page history ... SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 15:02, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Page Deletion[edit]


On June 11th you deleted the page for copyright infringement citing our website. Can you please reverse this process, as we ownt he website and the content, and were responsible for the upload to wiki there is no infringement


Jonathan Manchester Titans General Manager — Preceding unsigned comment added by ManchesterTitans (talkcontribs) 20:58, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@ManchesterTitans: Well, it is an infringement unless you release the content under a compliant license (such as CC BY-SA 3.0 License). Remember that Wikipedia articles may be altered and/or redistributed by anyone, including bundled up and sold as books. Read our page on donating copyrighted material for more information. Something important to remember is that if a page on your organization is created and remains on Wikipedia, you do not control it. Wikipedia operates on a consensus model and ultimately the page may not reflect exactly what you want. Ravensfire (talk) 21:45, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Your removal of SmileBlueJay97 from the Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants‎ list[edit]

With all due respect, I think that if you check here, you'll find that this editor does meet the requirements for this list. Unless, you have access to something that I don't that shows this edtitor has less than 500 mainspace edits?   ArcAngel   (talk) ) 19:46, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

SmileBlueJay97 is on the list. The user that I removed is WeigelaPen, who is short of the threshold, and on whose behalf SmileBlueJay97 seems to have made the edit. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 19:56, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Gotcha. My apologies, I seem to have misread your edit summary on that.   ArcAngel   (talk) ) 19:59, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
I also apologize for my edit. When I reverted WeigelaPen's edit, I removed his name as well. I re-added his name because I thought the requirement "a minimum of 500 undeleted edits to articles" meant 500 live edits. Now that I know it meant mainspace edits this will not happen again.  SmileBlueJay97  talk  20:18, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Don't worry about it – these things happen. All the best, SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 10:36, 13 August 2014 (UTC)


It must feel pretty good to be able to do this on your own now! When I saw them pop up on my watchlist I went to block and *poof*, already done :) --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 17:47, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Vandal you reverted is back[edit]

User:Midnite1469 has returned under another sock screen name (User:Midnite14769). I've also notified the original blocking admin. BusterD (talk) 03:07, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Back again. I've filed a sockpuppet report. BusterD (talk) 03:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)