User talk:Orangemike

Hans Christian King

Hi there. I'd like to know why this page got deleted so quickly even when I put the hangon tag on it. I was in the process of adding it, and had to answer a call at work. There is a valid body of experience here. I had intended it to look like this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Van_Praagh but you yanked it far too quickly for me to build it to that level. I request that it be undeleted so I can improve it to academic standards. user:curtisall 13:37, 13 May 2008 (EST)

Plastic Ingenuity Help

Last year a good friend of mine and I had a class with a professor that went on and on about a company that he worked with through the university. My friend came on to Wikipedia and noticed the company did not have a page so he started researching it further because it seemed interesting. We then both talked to the prof. outside of class, and got more information. I guess my friend tried to create a wikipedia page for Plastic Ingenuity, but it was deleted within a day because of a lack of significance. He and I looked at what was presented, and we understand that there was a lack of references present, and that the information should have been organized differently. He and I have been working on revisions, and have a great new page in our opinions, so I was just asking you for some advice to make sure it doesnt happen again. Any help you could give us would be greatly appreciated. Allstar11

You are clueless

I know Hdayejr and you have no business running your mouth when you only have knowledge of his war with Steve here last summer. You only know that much and nothing more. Makes you look just a bit ignorant. Get lost.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Holderowner (talk • contribs) — Holderowner (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Richard Stern - History Rewrite?

You stated in my request to have my page deleted that I can't "rewrite history." I would understand that if Jimmy Carter or Madonna tried to delete their page, but I was a D-List youtube account who contributed nothing to the greater consciousness of society, pop culture, science, or even history. If I was ever notable, which is open to discussion, those days are long past and my page is a complete waste of space. In fact, wikipedia should be ashamed to even consider having an entry for such an utter and total nobody. Please reconsider; this has absolutely no effect on you, nor will you remember this in a week, but this sticks with me forever. Thank you.

Northwestern University Men's Basketball

Please restore this page. It is of a notable Big Ten basketball team and due to your deletion, it is the only Big Ten men's basketball team to not have a page on Wikipedia. Furthermore, your reason for deletion is inapproriate. The information relating to the team would not be nonsense and if it was nonsense, it would most likely be due to vandalism, in which case deletion would not have been the proper course of action.Eb3686 20:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eb3686 (talk • contribs)

Here's the link where you're listed as the deleter:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northwestern_Wildcats_men%27s_basketball&action=edit&redlink=1

As you can see, it lists you as the deleter and your reason is listed as the nonsense one.

I saw this when looking at the "Men's basketball teams of the Big Ten Conference" bottom section of the Illinois Fighting Illini men's basketball article. Sorry if there's something that I missed along the way, I don't quite know all of the Wikipedia guidelines, but in any case, an article doesn't currently exist for this, and I'm guessing one did at least at some point in the past. Thanks for the response! (Eb3686 16:59, 9 June 2008 (UTC))

Ah, sorry, but I can't figure out how to make my signature show up properly with a link. --Eb3686 17:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I guess I'll start up a page myself =) -- eb3686 | talk 21:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I just finished a new version of the page. Do you mind looking it over, as this is my first attempt at writing a Wikipedia article? Thanks!-- eb3686 | talk 10:24, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Houston McCoy Article

Hey OrangeMike. I see you deleted my files for Improper License. Sorry if i'm uploading things incorrectly, as you can see I'm not a professional. I'm having trouble getting the right license for newspaper sources and articles. There doesn't seem to be a option in the pull down menu for scanned newspaper articles. I have all the info (author/date/article) and its a vaild source. Why can't I upload and cite these articles. Please lend me a small amount of your expertise. I just don't understand how the "fair use" rational and the copyright system works on wiki. The section about that doesn't included scanned newspaper/magazine articles, but rather article covers/pictures from the internet/photography etc. If I wanted to upload a scan of a newspaper or magazine article that is a valid source, how come there is no option for that in the drop down menu? What am I doing wrong here! :) I even include in the text where I found the article, the date and author. I even include that information in the uploaded file name. What else do I need to do! Any help would be great!

17:07, 5 June 2008 Orangemike (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Austin.American.Statesman.August.3.1979.Miles.pdf" ‎ (I3: Improper license)

Contesting Fundamental Elements Deletion

Mr. Orange. I am trying to create a page for a band on the rise that has met more than enough of Wikipedias criteria to have "notability" as a musician yet you all keep deleting it, and always say I'm advertising. However, the page consists of absolutely no advertising. It's a variety of facts about a band from St. Louis written by myself or other non-biased authors, I am not a member of the band, and I do not work for them. Some feedback would be nice as to why this page continues to be deleted for reasons that are not relevant.

I apologize for this being at the top, I tried to delete and send to the bottom but it went back to this.

-chris emanuel

Deletion of LA-944

I had updated the reason for the speedy deleletion- they said it was because i did not have a reason why LA-944 was important i explained that it was because LA-944 is a very noticed part in the community. i was also not done with the page- i had a few more sections to add. please explain. (i am not mad, just curious) Cyruskety (talk) 17:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Gray magick

You deleted the gray magic page. I really don't know much about writing articles but i do know that there should be articles about gray magic white magic and black magic. And if you like orange magic. also what was so nonsensual about the articles i tried to make about gray magic??? --Condolence( 05:23, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

another Pinoybandwagon sock, repeating the behaviour

User:Sir_Astig is an obvious Pioybandwagon sock, and has been removing the callsign from the lead and infobox on several articles. This time he has also used edit summaries like "removing redundancy" as excuse, when there was no such redundancy.

Can you block him as an obvious sock that is repeating the behaviour that got him blocked on the first place? --Enric Naval (talk) 20:27, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, and also block him because he has tried to label one of his socks as being the responsible for those three "Montez" socks, look at this for an example, and look at his contribs for edits to the socks' user pages and to a category page --Enric Naval (talk) 20:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

There is another Pinoybandwagon sock just created recently (User:Xtreme Blaster). The user is also implying that Zosimo Montez is the real sock of Pinoybandwagon. -Danngarcia (talk) 07:16, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I also left a complain on the talk page of the admin that handled the Zosimo Montez sock case here, it seems that he is trying to introduce hoaxes on the articles, see this page which looks suspiciously empty except for the page that he is using as source. The topping the charts page is, well.... no way that this is an official page. --Enric Naval (talk) 17:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

He's blocked now [3] --Enric Naval (talk) 18:50, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Jamie Hamilton (motorcycle racer)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Jamie Hamilton (motorcycle racer). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Davewild (talk) 20:57, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Ionized bracelet

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ionized bracelet. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 02:40, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I have specifically asked to request to join the discussion there about these articles.

Would you mind also restoring Talk:Ionized bracelet? I think you missed it. Thanks. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 13:58, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Purr Mama Resistor is dead

hi. you deleted Purr Mama Resistor. go team. could you be so kind as to tell me where the content has been relegated or sandboxed to so i can post it on another website? thanks. Larsro (talk) 14:51, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Purderous Magina Records is dead

hi. you deleted Purderous Magina Records. go team. could you be so kind as to tell me where the content has been relegated or sandboxed to so i can post it on another website? thanks. Larsro (talk) 14:57, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Good job!!!

I had nominated 4 articles (mostly about living persons) and saw you swiftly deleted them. Just wanted to say thanks and keep up the good work. I am trying to make sure WP:WikiProject India has new articles that comply to Wikipedia standards.

--gppande «talk» 15:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

SeaPort Airlines

Why the delete? It's a new airline and unique because it bypasses major commercial centers at airports. It's news worthy and interesting, especially in today's airline industry climate. Mfrk

Please reinstate article for Chaindriven

For the following reasons, please do not delete the new article about Chaindriven, as it contains the following notable content which is both important and significant: 1. Chaindriven just won a contest at KLOS, the largest classic rock station in Los Angeles. This contest received more than 300 entries. 2. The Chaindriven article includes a citation to verify that Chaindriven won this contest. 3. This contest was held by the Mark & Brian show, one of the most popular morning radio shows in Los Angeles.

4. The Chaindriven article is as notable as any of the other articles that were created under the

category. Most of those articles do not contain any citations, or any "important and significant" information.

I welcome any suggestions that you may have to make this article stronger. However, please do not just arbitrarily delete this article. JackBaker5 (talk) 16:38, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Hasty deletion of Standpoint Magazine

This page (content below) was deleted instantly. Despite my posting of {{hangon}} Perhaps you do not follow political magazines , and were under the misimpression that this is some sort of non-notable or vanity publication. Perhaps you were merely hasty . Please note that while this publication is new, it is handsomely funded and the project of a group of distinguished, experienced journalists and that its notability is established by the media attention it is receiving.

Standpoint is a “much anticipated new cultural and political monthly magazine” launched in June 2008. It is based in London and edited by Daniel Johnson (journalist).<refr>[ http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2008/06/8c07d84f-2300-4b8d-ae6a-08311ce1aeba.html]</ref>

The editors announced that their “core mission is to celebrate our civilization, its arts and its values – in particular democracy, debate and freedom of speech – at a time when they are under threat.”

Michael J. Totten calls it “impressive.”

Margareta Pagano writing in The Independent desscribes Standpoint as “a highbrow magazine that launches next month to "defend and celebrate" Western civilisation in the post-9/11 era.” “.Standpoint is funded for "at least" a year by the Social Affairs Unit, the independent think-tank linked to the Institute of Economic Affairs (the source of Margaret Thatcher's free-market thinking).” The first issue included art by David Hockney, poetry by Robert Conquest, criticism by Andrew Marr, articles by Ian Bostridge, Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali, Jung Chang, Simon Sebag Montefiore, Tim Congdon, Michael Burleigh, Douglas Murray, Alasdair Palmer , Edward Lucas, Emanuele Ottolenghi, Jay Nordlinger Bruce Bawer and Jonathan Bate.

Elan26 (talk) 16:39, 17 June 2008 (UTC)Elan26

Webpage

http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/

References

.Elan26 (talk) 16:39, 17 June 2008 (UTC)Elan26

RE: National Express West Midlands route 283 article

For your information, i was going to be working on it but you had removed the above mentioned article before that. it is a cross Midlands bus rout with a jucey history. i should know most the history because i worked for the companies that has ran the route.

I would like the page restored or i shall go for a deletion review. Please repy on my talk page.

DudleybusUser talk:Dudleybus 8:09, 18 June 2008 (UTC), 09:09 (BST)

Deletion review for National Express West Midlands route 283

An editor has asked for a deletion review of National Express West Midlands route 283. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Dudleybus^{please talkwith the UK Transport Wiki} 11:07, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

re: gabriel olds picture

I'm unclear why you deleted the free picture provided for Gabriel Olds, actor. I'll re-instate, assuming it was a mistake. If it was not, or you disagree, feel free to reply to me directly. Ps: i like your orange hat. I hope you wear it while typing.  ;)

Wonton884User talk:Wonton884 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.235.212.215 (talk) 18:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Zemanta article - NO blatant advertising!

Greetings, I would like to hear an elaboration on why the Zemanta article was speedily deleted upon accusations of blatant advertising. I consider it to be a devaluation of my work as I'm not a part of Zemanta and even though I am using the plugin, I remained very objective in my writing. No promotion or advertising, mentioning how "good" it is and so forth, just stating some basic facts on what it is and what it does. That is why I made the core of article about the company and Not the product.

The only reason I can think of why it's been deleted is that you've considered my neutral point of view writing to be PR since I aimed for a condensed pile of facts that could be attributed to further at a later point in time - since I think there's plenty more to write about.

So, with all due respect, what was the actual reason for deleting the article? I maintain my position that there was absolutely nothing wrong with it as a starting point for a new developing article and that it should therefore be reinstated/undeleted/repositioned. However, if there actually were some minor detalis to fix I am of course prepared to listen what needs to be repaired.

Z-lot —Preceding unsigned comment added by Z-lot (talk • contribs) 18:40, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up, my pulse has gone down a bit :) Yet still, Zemanta is not such a non-notable company - it's a web startup, that is true, but this is all that could serve as an argument for being not notable. What put it on the map a long time ago was an article in TechCrunch (I never even had the chance to add that detail to the article!), I assume that you are aware of its importance - this is far more important than the Guardian interview (that I actually did reference) or perhaps even [http://avc.blogs.com/a_vc/2008/06/trying-zemanta.html Fred Wilson}'s thoughts. Another "notable" thing is the thing that they're developing - its function is quite unique and certainly a benefit to the blogosphere at large (one of the feature requests by us users was also a plugin for Wikipedia platform, I hope they'll work on that too). If that's not notable, I truly don't know what it is. It's not just some irrelevant garage company.

With that said, I would still like the article back since it is bound to reappear sooner rather than later. So please, take a look at the links I provided and make a second judgement. I'm confident that your conclusion will be somewhat different.

--Z-lot 19:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay then, I respect your decision. I'll just wait until it gets broader independent coverage then. It shouldn't take long :)

--Z-lot 20:02, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Connecticut Gay Men's Chorus

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Connecticut Gay Men's Chorus. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Davewild (talk) 21:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

CSD

Hi Orangemike I hope you don't mind a friendly note of advice but I have seen a couple of your deletions at DRV recently and a quick look at your talk page suggests that there has been some disquiet about your deletions recently. I wondered whether you might be willing to consider sending some of the more borderline deletions to AFD rather then nuking them at CSD? My own view is that the amount of time it take to list something with Twinkle is negligible given how much time and angst gets wasted arguing the toss with unhappy editors and fighting a process like DRV that is inherently in favour of keeping articles if at all possible. I know there is a real temptation to try and save the AFD stuff that looks like it hasn't a hope but you would be surprised what can be salvaged during an AFD discussion and sometimes its just not worth fighting a lost cause. Obviously its down to you what you do but I just thought I should make the suggestion. Best Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:50, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

• In that case, I hope yu don't mind my suggesting you leave these borderline cases for someone else to handle. That will free you up to do more interesting stuff andthere are plenty of admins around who haven't used up their quotient of drama or have twinkle so can list stuff really quick. Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

The Prelude

Hi there, I ask that you re-install the page for The Prelude (band) since it is a page about a music band, and to be honest it is no more advertising than other pages such as The_Paddingtons, or The_Others_(band), or Guillemots, or Alexis_Blue or just about 97% of the bands that one finds in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:British_indie_rock_groups or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:English_musical_groups or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Music_from_London or any other category in the music/band-related pages that appear on wikipedia.

furthermore, it IS true that if you look at the results of a search on google for "prelude liverpool" you get 5 pages of hits since the band are becoming extremely popular, have recently been praised by the music press on both sides of the pond, and more reasons of the sort http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=prelude+liverpool&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

Thanks.

Springfling (talk) 22:53, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of redirect

It appears that you (and the original tagging editor) applied the wrong set of guidelines in speedy-deleting Basoexia and Apistia earlier: It was a redirect, not a regular article. A3 is the wrong category, and Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Redirects allows this page. Would you undelete the page for me? Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:54, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I honor your willingness to do things that you don't like, solely because of the existing consensus. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Be careful with national varieties of English

I thank you for the information. Once more, even though I am well traveled, this does surprise me. I will take note of it moving forward. (Majin Takeru (talk) 03:59, 19 June 2008 (UTC))

SMV speedy delete

The logs indicate you were the deleting admin on SMV (band). According to WP:CSD#A7, only reasonable indication of why the article might be notable is necessary. I believe I've provided that in my discussion with the nominating editor (see: User talk:Legotech#SMV speedy delete and User talk:Fru1tbat#SMV (band)). In summary, it appears to me that, considering the group is made up of 3 notable and influential musicians, according to WP:MUSIC#Criteria for musicians and ensembles #6 ("Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable" - in this case all 3 members) it is by definition notable. Certainly, it would seem to qualify for "a reasonable indication" of notability. I understand that there's not a whole lot of information available at present, as the group was only recently formed, but isn't that what stub articles are for? When I wrote the article, I assumed the links to the members' articles would be enough to provide verifiability of its notability. What other criteria need to be filled? Thanks. --Fru1tbat (talk) 14:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for The Prelude (band)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Prelude (band). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Springfling (talk) 23:13, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Akaza talk page

I apologize for the clearing of the talk page, I was not sure what the rules of that were. The deletion I made was to clear the page of old discussions that were pertaining to the delete/keep discussion. Since the article was kept and I have changed it completely, none of that was applicable. Thus I wanted to clear the page. What are the rules for talk pages? Thanks. Idegtev (talk) 18:02, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I will keep that in mind, apologies for the deletion. Idegtev (talk) 18:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

What's going on?

What's Contextflex? I don't think we've ever worked on anything together, but the other person I was gonna ask, has retired, and since wikipedia is gennerally friendly, I'd like to know. I don't mean to waste any time, I'm just curious what this is all about. Yojimbo501 (talk) 19:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I read that article a moment ago and that is just cruel doing something like that to people who only wish to increase knowledge for Wikipedia... Can anything be done about this? It is just childish to search for someones identity, and then post about how you hate that person. Can this somehow be taken to court? Does anybody believe this bullshit "Wiki-war"? Yojimbo501 (talk) 21:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

New Series Adventure novels

ALL are in violation of WP:CRYSTAL? Even the ones which are out already? And how come stating that the LHC is going to be switched on at some point in 2008 isn't a violation of crystal but giving facts about a book that is going to be released is? I'm sorry, you're completely wrong. Clockwork Apricot (talk) 20:47, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Username block

Parature08 sent me an email requesting an unblock because he wants to follow recommendations in this DRV. Passing the request on for your consideration..--chaser (away) - talk 10:59, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Kalikova and (&) Associates

Thank you for your message and comments. I'm still getting introduced with the requirements for editing articles and I will try to be more attentive further. Can I continue working on this article, i.e. could it be created but "fundamentally rewritten" to meet the applicable requirements? Mmadykov (talk) 06:12, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Partners in torah

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Partners in torah. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 16:12, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Sackville Rivers Association

Please restore Sackville Rivers Association. I had cut it down to a stub because of copyright concerns, and was preparing to add references. --Eastmain (talk) 17:39, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Sackvilleriversassociation

Mike

Whether or not the Sackville rivers association article is restored, the creator's user page is clearly spam and inappropriate as is the user name. Would it be appropriate for a non-admin to blank the user page or is that something for an admin? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ukexpat (talk • contribs)

Took care of it. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:29, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Adding irrelevancies to Anti-Federalism

Please don't do this sort of thing. Your intentions may have been good, but it's really a form of vandalism to say something like that in an article. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:50, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Can you explain what you mean? It seems relevant. William Ortiz (talk) 20:51, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Prof.Carlos Nemer

Hi Orangemike, Prof. Carlos Nemer Article was deleted, please help me knowing the reason, the man is an extraordinary person and he is responsible for implementing a Wikipedia funding project at Federal University of Rio de Janeiro... How can we help saving the article? all the best Fulvio Morais do Rego

See the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlos E Nemer and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlos E. Nemer. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:13, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Manisouras

Hi Orangemike,

I have twice put a Speedy Delete tag on this article Manisouras, as I think it is probably nonsense - and twice the editor has removed it... despite a 'polite' warning notice I put on their talk page. When you get a chance, please could you take a look and decide what to do next? Thanks.--seahamlass 18:39, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

MCGEE BIOSKETCH

Hi Orangemike, I do not want to be engaged in some sort of referencing request battle but seriously the claims you are making about "needing better references" are specious. There is nothing here that in any way is unverifiable, which is the standard. Simply asserting that the article written was poorly researched or insufficiently referenced seems egregious to me. I am correcting libelous claims here and you are right behind me suggesting that known facts aren't sufficiently documented. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.76.183.8 (talk) 21:37, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Further to your comment, this information IS verifiable. See the Institute for Scientific Information Journal Citation Index published last week, the leading source of information about scholarly journals. I will be happy to email you a PDF. There isn't a better source than ISI.--74.76.183.8 (talk) 21:44, 25 June 2008 (UTC)--

Interesting article

I think you'd enjoy reading Rev. Nørb, especially after looking at the author. My bet is that you'll delete this one. I don't feel like messing with it. Royalbroil 05:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Batak Fitness System

Hi - you deleted my page on the Batak Fitness System, claiming it was "blatant advertising". It would have been preferable if you could have entered into a discussion concerning the deletion rather than just doing it.

To clarify: 'Batak' was one of the rounds in a fitness competition here at work, and we had no idea what it was. When we found out, we added it to Wikipedia so that others would not have so much trouble finding out in future. It is not 'blatant advertising' as I have no personal interest in the Batak company.

-- richiau —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richiau (talk • contribs) 14:41, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback on this. I've done a bit of research and found that the UK daily newspaper The Citizen reported on 30 January 2007 that Batak is an "electronic test of reflex game" which is used professional rugby players and the football team Manchester United, as part of their fitness programme. Would this be enough to warrant that it is significant? -- richiau —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richiau (talk • contribs) 12:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Vietnam Awesome Travel

I would have no objection to a spamblock. I thought that, for a very new user, a {{usernameconcern}} comment might be enough. He has not edited at all except for his userpage and one reverted edit. Perhaps I WP:AGF too easily, but it's much easier to discourage an editor than it is to attract one. A good one, anyway. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 19:33, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Skeptoid AFD

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Skeptoid

I think this is a case for a speedy keep because it appears to be sour grapes from some podcast/blog that did not get in... --BenBurch (talk) 10:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

More crap on the Violet Blue (author) section...

From the comments, it appears that her POSSLQ (aka boyfriend) is editing it now...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violet_Blue_%28author%29

--BenBurch (talk) 17:39, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Please see COI warning I placed at; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wikiwikimoore based upon conversation at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Norquist9 Thanks! --BenBurch (talk) 19:52, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Orangemike, thank you for that action. This same conflicted editor, and another editor who may be a sock puppet of his, are also trying to force a Violet Blue edit into the Boing Boing page about the same silliness, for what would appear to be the same non-NPOV, personally motivated reasons. Please see recent edit history on Boing Boing. Norquist9 (talk) 23:20, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Plymouth Rock Studios

A week ago you deleted the page for the reason that it wasn't notable. I want to contest that decision only because it is notable. The company plans to build a movie studio in Plymouth, Massachusetts. This studio would be the first in New England and possibly the only one east of the Mississippi River. I at least think the article, which existed for over a month, should've been deleted with a discussion. It seems unfair that it would be done since the article is about a company notable to the community as of now and eventualy will be better known after the studio is built. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:25, 29 June 2008 (UTC)