User talk:Yanksox: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
If there is any sentence, any word in that entire article that violates BLP, please point it out. The article itself is not libellous, but the personal attacks you made in deleting it are quite offensive. —<tt class="plainlinks">'''[[Special:Contributions/Freakofnurture|freak]]([{{fullurl:user talk:freakofnurture|action=edit§ion=new}} talk])'''</tt> 16:32, Feb. 23, 2007 (UTC) |
If there is any sentence, any word in that entire article that violates BLP, please point it out. The article itself is not libellous, but the personal attacks you made in deleting it are quite offensive. —<tt class="plainlinks">'''[[Special:Contributions/Freakofnurture|freak]]([{{fullurl:user talk:freakofnurture|action=edit§ion=new}} talk])'''</tt> 16:32, Feb. 23, 2007 (UTC) |
||
:Freak, this isn't about the rules. The rules don't exist, the rules were made to endorse kids who giggle and torment people when they can. This is the most absurd thing I've ever seen. We are not almighty, we are not great, Jimmy Wales is not god, you need to think and ask if someone who '''very''' few people knew outside of this is worth keeping if they have personal wishes. I for one, would not want a Wikipedia article. This whole thing is magnificent in theory, but it's gone out of control, it's time to harness everything and fix this goddamn mess. [[User talk:Yanksox|<font color="black">Yank</font><font color="red">sox</font>]] 16:35, 23 February 2007 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 16:35, 23 February 2007
.....And I just came here to give you a barnstar for your boldness and humanity--Docg 13:28, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
About bloody time too. And, when it stays dead, I'll know Wikipedia has matured!--Docg 13:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Daniel Brandt. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --Cat out 14:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Umm... WTF is going on? I can understand the desire to get rid of that cesspool, but unilaterally deleting the article and the talk is not the way. Can you provide any reason why I shouldn't undelete? Zocky | picture popups 15:19, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- He seems to have gone for now - we are currently discussing this on DRV, perhaps you'd like to contribute to that.--Docg 15:23, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
If there is any sentence, any word in that entire article that violates BLP, please point it out. The article itself is not libellous, but the personal attacks you made in deleting it are quite offensive. —freak(talk) 16:32, Feb. 23, 2007 (UTC)
- Freak, this isn't about the rules. The rules don't exist, the rules were made to endorse kids who giggle and torment people when they can. This is the most absurd thing I've ever seen. We are not almighty, we are not great, Jimmy Wales is not god, you need to think and ask if someone who very few people knew outside of this is worth keeping if they have personal wishes. I for one, would not want a Wikipedia article. This whole thing is magnificent in theory, but it's gone out of control, it's time to harness everything and fix this goddamn mess. Yanksox 16:35, 23 February 2007 (UTC)