User talk:Thright

Hey ho...

Thanks for your message. I suppose that blanking CAT:CSD is one way of hiding your mistakes, but a remarkably quick way of having lots of people notice them. In the same way, administrators deleting WP:ANI have a fool-proof method of hiding all complaints about them without anyone noticing... Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 08:39, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

they really should learnThright (talk) 17:02, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Stop removing valid content

Stop removing valid content and then making as speedy for having no valid content. If you want the references improved use the {{refimprove}} tag. If you simply think the article shouldn't exist at all then take it to AFD. You appear to be trying to cause disruptions on many pages. -Djsasso (talk) 17:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Stop removing valid content and then making as speedy for having no valid content. If you want the references improved use the {{refimprove}} tag. If you simply think the article shouldn't exist at all then take it to AFD. You appear to be trying to cause disruptions on many pages. -Djsasso (talk) 17:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Where is this info? "Buckman began his Minnetonka football career starting at placekicker as a sophomore in 2003. Buckman was the first-team all-conference and all-state selection at Minnetonka High School during both his junior and senior seasons as a placekicker. Buckman was named the 2004 first-team Nike all-american placekicker as well as a Tom Lemming all-american. Buckman was 18-21 on field goals with a long of 47 yards, and 92% of his kickoffs went for touchbacks out of the endzone. Buckman was ranked as the #1 kicker in the nation by multiple recruiting services. Buckman was an official nominee for the 2006 U.S. Army All-American Bowl as well as a 2005 Street & Smith's Senior to Watch. He was also a two-year all-conference selection in lacrosse as a defensemen.[1]" Can you find it? I can't. Are you just pushing the rollback button and not looking at the comments? Are you open for recall?Thright (talk) 17:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

what you refer to 'disruptions' other users refer to correcting errors... see the difference?Thright (talk) 17:39, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I find it extremely disruptive, read WP:CSD if it doesn't meet on of the criteria then it's not a speedy deletion candidate. If you want an article to be deleted use WP:AfD if the speedy deletion is contested by multiple users. The Dominator (talk) 17:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

for those who cannot read, "No context. Very short articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article." and dominator, you have been warned for trolling. Please stop. Thank youThright (talk) 17:43, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Only because you deleted the content, and that applies only to articles that have almost zero content, let's say up to ten words. And I suggest you don't make personal attacks. The Dominator (talk) 17:45, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Quite honestly it appears that you are trying to remove information that you don't like. You are readding speedy tags after someone has contested them which is not how things are done. Once something is contested you take it to WP:AFD. You have removed content a few times before trying to speedy an article for having no content. If you have removed all the content, then you cannot delete for having little or no content, so thus you are failing to meet that qualification for speedy. -Djsasso (talk) 17:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

???

Not sure what you're talking about. I remember editing an article where you have edited, you accidently deleted the sources, categories and defaultsort so I restored them. The Dominator (talk) 17:31, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

time will tell!Thright (talk) 17:34, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Inappropriate speedy requests

Please stop abusing the speedy deletion. You are persistently tagging articles for speedy deletion using reasons that are not one of the specified criteria for speedy deletion. The CSD mechanism is only to be used for the specific, narrowly defined criteria set out by policy. For other cases where an article does not meet policy but the reason is not covered by the Speedy criteria, please use the proposed deletion process instead. Thanks, Gwernol 17:38, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Since you insist, for example: [1] Gwernol 17:43, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Djsasso I thought we agreed to disagree? WHy do you need the last word? IF you understood wiki policy, you would know that unsourced info SHOULD be deleted. Look at the users who edited the page, only purpose accounts with edits only to that page. WHere is the info???? Deleting the page makes it sdp, This is CLEAR COMMON SENSE!!! In any case, agree to disagree and move onThright (talk) 17:49, 17 March 2008 (UTC)