User talk:Maxim: Difference between revisions
m Reverted 1 edit by 122.164.48.212 identified as vandalism to last revision by Trusilver. using TW |
No edit summary |
||
Line 228: | Line 228: | ||
I am an advisor to the National Hockey League. With your help over the next few months I plan to review and correct any information on wikipedia relating to the National Hockey League, its franchises, players, executives and partership organisations. I am here to provide you with information. Your work is appreciated. --[[User:NHLsource|NHLsource]] 18:11, 9 August 2007 (UTC) |
I am an advisor to the National Hockey League. With your help over the next few months I plan to review and correct any information on wikipedia relating to the National Hockey League, its franchises, players, executives and partership organisations. I am here to provide you with information. Your work is appreciated. --[[User:NHLsource|NHLsource]] 18:11, 9 August 2007 (UTC) |
||
Fucker!! |
Revision as of 08:16, 10 August 2007
|
|
Done
Obviously done. :-) —« ANIMUM » 19:31, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Newsletter
I see you posted a request on my talk. I was away. Anyway, next time you need the newsletter delivered, just tell me. (Animum said he'd let me do it). --(Review Me) R ParlateContribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 20:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- Please give me a diff to said statement. :-P —« ANIMUM » 20:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
My RfA
Hi Maxim, and thanks for your participation in my RfA. I've withdrawn it, and have written up an "analysis" of it, which is available at User:Giggy/RfA/Giggy. Please come around when you get the chance, and give me feedback on how I can improve. Also, sorry for the late note, I didn't see your comments originally. Thanks again, Giggy Talk | Review 22:24, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Maxim, I was linked to User Talk:71.175.143.192 and told I vandalized Talk: XFL and then finally Virginia Tech Massacre. The 2nd (last!) warning was from EvilClown93 which links to you. I don't remember updating either of these topics (or any others for that matter) can I find out what I said? and can I exonerate myself? I am the only one with access to this computer, but it's very buggy, and also possibly my brother said something here, and I'd like to find out
- Somebody used that IP (your brother, maybe), and vandalised (I looked at the contributions). If you don't want to have a direct connection to the IP, create an account. Maxim 11:28, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Credit Action query
Deletion query Maxim - On July 6th you deleted the page 'Credit Action'. I am wondering if you could give me an explanation as to why this action was taken. Cheers. Tappyea2 15:14, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
It was blatant advertising, which is allowed to be deleted on sight per this policy, and more specifically this criterion. Hope that helps! Maxim 23:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok thanks for explanation. However I would question whether it was in fact blatant advertising. It didn't promote any services or company. Credit Action is a charity which does financial education, the main aim of the article was simply informative as to what the charity does and given that the content was entirely factual I don't see what the problem is. I merely added because I thought it could be useful to people looking for a charity which did this kind of work. I would like you to consider reinstating the article as I'm really not sure it does fall foul of the criteria you mention. Thanks. Tappyea2 11:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
A response would be appreciated. Cheers mate. Tappyea2 15:52, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, I archived something too quickly again. The problem is that it lacks notability for inclusion, and it the article didn't assert notability, even if it met the guideline. I realise you might be a bit dissatisfied with my decision not to restore it; however, I suggest, if you want some sort of review of this action to go to deletion review. Maxim 11:50, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Deletion of La-Mulana?
Why was La-Mulana deleted? There was a notice of prod and it was not removed since it was still some objection to removing it. I think this article at least deserves a vote if it is to be deleted.Subanark 18:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- Because it was proposed for deletion. Nobody objected, and per policy, it was deleted after five days. You've misunderstood the policy. The exact reason for deletion is quoted directly from the template in the summary. Maxim 11:52, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
- The notice was on the article since November. I originally objected to that and took down the notice after a week. The original posted of the notice then put it back up where I objected again, but left it up there. I thought the article was in a finished state, so I stopped watching it. The subject has become much more notable than it was when the notice was first put up. Even if no one was actively watching the article does not mean it was not noteworthy.
Battle of Washita River-related user conduct RfCs
As an administrator who has been involved with the long-term disputes about the article Battle of Washita River (which is still under full protection), I want to inform you of the two related user-conduct RfCs that have now been certified:
Thanks for your past efforts in trying to help us deal with the disputes about this article. --Yksin 20:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- FYI, a related article RfC has been initiated at Talk:Battle of Washita River#Request for comment. We could really use some comments from people outside the dispute. Thanks. --Yksin 02:19, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.
Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 31 | 30 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 00:14, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
August 4 DYK
--Andrew c [talk] 11:47, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your support in my Request for Adminship. Unfortunately the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project, and I'll try again in a few months! If you ever have any questions or suggestions for me, please don't hesitate to contact me. Best wishes, --Elonka 06:45, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 32 | 6 August 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:06, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- ForteTuba 15:09, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello WikiProject Ice Hockey/Participant
I am an advisor to the National Hockey League. With your help over the next few months I plan to review and correct any information on wikipedia relating to the National Hockey League, its franchises, players, executives and partership organisations. I am here to provide you with information. Your work is appreciated. --NHLsource 18:11, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Fucker!!