User talk:The Mark of the Beast: Difference between revisions
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
Why are you prodding this? It is not in mainspace yet, it is a work in progress in a user space. [[User:The Last Angry Man|The Last Angry Man]] ([[User talk:The Last Angry Man|talk]]) 00:10, 14 September 2011 (UTC) |
Why are you prodding this? It is not in mainspace yet, it is a work in progress in a user space. [[User:The Last Angry Man|The Last Angry Man]] ([[User talk:The Last Angry Man|talk]]) 00:10, 14 September 2011 (UTC) |
||
:You are right that BLP applies to user pages, but that page is not in violation of BLP. [[WP:BLP]] requires that '''controversial''' BLP content is always referenced on user pages. Non-controversial stuff on a draft is okay. The main motivation of the BLP policy is to prevent Wikipedia from being sued for libel. --[[User:Surturz|Surturz]] ([[User talk:Surturz|talk]]) 08:42, 14 September 2011 (UTC) |
:You are right that BLP applies to user pages, but that page is not in violation of BLP. [[WP:BLP]] requires that '''controversial''' BLP content is always referenced on user pages. Non-controversial stuff on a draft is okay. The main motivation of the BLP policy is to prevent Wikipedia from being sued for libel. --[[User:Surturz|Surturz]] ([[User talk:Surturz|talk]]) 08:42, 14 September 2011 (UTC) |
||
==War 2007 Film== |
|||
Do you have time to watch War 2007 Film ([[User:Sean Archer123|Sean Archer123]] ([[User talk:Sean Archer123|talk]]) 01:27, 15 September 2011 (UTC)). |
|||
Revision as of 01:27, 15 September 2011
Please post below this line:
I edited it to show the actual word to word quote that he posted to pastebin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jordan nV (talk • contribs) 23:40, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
You recent revert in Comodo Group
Hello.
May I remind you that supplying an edit summary for every revert is mandatory? Yes, I believe your revert was a valid one but that would not be good pretext for not supplying an edit summary. Please be careful in the future. Thanks.
Fleet Command (talk) 07:12, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
- It was surely not vandalism. It was a bona fide attempt to contribute something, though the result was awful. Your edit summary should have read: "Low quality contribution that lacks coherence. Also has no [[WP:V|source]] and violates [[WP:DUE]]."
- I must say I have personally seen very little instances in which someone added something to the article that was indeed vandalism, i.e an attempt to ruin the article. Yes, test edits, self-promotion, COI, fanaticism and much more, but none are vandalism. The only instances of vandalism that I have seen that was done by adding material was insertion of offensive words or random characters. You can read more in Wikipedia:Not everyone who disagrees with you is a vandal.
Good work in catching that blatant copvio from the two-edit author. I invite you back to the AFD and the article, as my google-foo is in high gear. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 01:06, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
User:Snjflame/Ahna O'Reilly
Why are you prodding this? It is not in mainspace yet, it is a work in progress in a user space. The Last Angry Man (talk) 00:10, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
- You are right that BLP applies to user pages, but that page is not in violation of BLP. WP:BLP requires that controversial BLP content is always referenced on user pages. Non-controversial stuff on a draft is okay. The main motivation of the BLP policy is to prevent Wikipedia from being sued for libel. --Surturz (talk) 08:42, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
War 2007 Film
Do you have time to watch War 2007 Film (Sean Archer123 (talk) 01:27, 15 September 2011 (UTC)).