User talk:Resurgent insurgent

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JoeyC5 (talk | contribs) at 15:41, 10 May 2007 (→‎Wikify CJ Johnson). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Spammers for banhammers

Latest dumping, all today. Some of these pages got deleted before I noticed that they existed.

In the meantime, here's something interesting. MER-C 12:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhat mouldy spam pages. MER-C 11:41, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Now That's What I Call Music! 25 (U.S. series)

I might point out that one of the conditions of the deletion of this article was that there was no prejudice to recreation within a few months once the album had come out. I don't know if the circumstances have changed (I can't see the deleted version), and I can't remember when it was slated to come out. As such, I believe this article may not qualify as g4. Part Deux 18:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons

Both good reasons for deletion. - Ta bu shi da yu 04:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice going. Hope you feel happy with your abuse of power. - Ta bu shi da yu 05:05, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

USP Project

I find it funny that a class was apparently given an assignment to make wikipedia articles. Are any of the articles worth keeping? nadav 09:38, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    • Northlight School is quite well done but there's an article about National pride survey(singapore) that is thoroughly shot through with original research and will definitely need AfD. (Last I checked the article's creator had duplicated it under other names as well.) Please check Special:Contributions/Setmeal and clean up after him, as well as redlinked users who've edited the "hua yu cool" and "Coffee Shop" articles, among others. These are all NUS students and their work will need cleaning up after. The articles tend to be weirdly formatted (large images, lots of forced line breaks) and may have original research. I cannot help right now because I need to study for an exam paper tomorrow. —Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-19 12:56Z

Summaries

Apologies, i will try to remember to mark all my edits with summaires in the future. --Jimmi Hugh 15:51, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Admin coaching

Hi..I am hoping that you do the honor of becoming my coach. I'm not too blunt, am I? Thanks in advance! Cheers!! Zacharycrimsonwolf 13:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC) 14:38, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah..um..its okay. Thanks again..I'll try the others. Cheers! Zacharycrimsonwolf 13:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC) 14:45, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Biological Systems Engineering

Hello. I am the administrator who reviewed your proposed deletion for this article. I agree with you that the article contains original research and doesn't contain adequate sources. Howver, for the reasons explained in Talk:Biological Systems Engineering, I believe the article doesn't meet the Criteria for deletion appropriate for a proposed deletion. The existence of university departments establishes that the topic exists and is notable. Accordingly, I have removed the proposed deletion tag and substituted an Original Research tag. Best, --Shirahadasha 17:54, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I see that you've been an administrator for some time as User:Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh while I'm a very newly minted one. I do believe that if the existence and notability of a subject is established but some of the description of it is unsourced, maintenance tags are the prefered route to deleting the whole article -- and one could always stubbify if need be. In this case I believe the university department web sites that were linked to meet the definition of WP:RS, hence I believe portions of the article are reliably sourced. Best, --Shirahadasha 18:24, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Patent nonsense

Hi, I completely agree with your closing of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marmofecal cure as delete (clearly WP:HOAX), but I thought I'd point out that it doesn't meet the definition of WP:PN because it's not totally incoherent, it's much closer to WP:BOLLOCKS. CSD G1: Patent nonsense specifically excludes hoaxes. Cheers, Pete.Hurd 15:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glenn Knight

Great job with that article! - SpLoT // 09:53, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poplar Tree Elementary School

Updated DYK query On 26 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Poplar Tree Elementary School, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 20:00, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:AfD nomination of Singapore Airlines awards and accolades

Before I forget, a word of thanks for dropping the message in my talkpage! ;)--Huaiwei 16:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Updated DYK query On 29 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Glenn Knight, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Carabinieri 23:25, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taxonomy Warehouse

Could you please stop removing links from the Factiva page to the Taxonomy Warehouse page. This website is not spam. It's owned by Factiva, which is in turn owned by Dow Jones, and is a proper part of the business - just the same as the other links. If you're going to set your self up to police this site at LEAST spend some time doing a little homework first.

Tellabs

Hello, you flagged the Tellabs site a while back, and it has since been rewritten. Could you take another look at it? 204.154.128.114 13:26, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Wikify CJ Johnson

Hi, you flagged the article, "CJ Johnson" to be wikified. I looked over the article and I'm unsure what needs to be wikified. It looks fine. I had administators look at it before so, I'm not sure. The internal links are fine and relevant. The section layout looks fine too. The article was made in comparison to other articles wrote on living people. So, I don't know. Can you let me know, what we're looking for so, that I may improve the article and you can remove the tag. Thanks, mate. JoeyC5 15:34, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and thanks for categorizing the article, I was having some trouble doing that. JoeyC5 15:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Resurgent_insurgent&oldid=129841365"