User talk:Wuhwuzdat

SEMI-RETIRED

This user is no longer very active on Wikipedia.

PAGE RULES:

1) A new topic requires a new section.

2) New sections go at the bottom of this page.

3) New sections require titles.

4) New replies go underneath the post they are in reply to.

5) Sign your posts by typing ~~~~. (Sinebot doesn't work here)
- (please sign at the END of your posts, not at the beginning!)

6) Posts must be coherent and civil.

I reserve the right to delete, without response, any and every posting from people unwilling or unable to obey these simple requests._{Per this guideline.}

If your post is in reference to an article, it would be greatly appreciated if you would provide a link to the article in question.

If you are here to tell me you changed or declined a speedy delete tag that you disagreed with, feel free to NOT leave me a note.

I respect your opinion, experience, and judgment on this matter.

I also irrevocably agreed to release my contributions under the GFDL, and that includes the speedy delete tags!

If you still feel that leaving a comment on one of these matter is truly necessary, I ask that you check the edit history of the article in question, and view the version of the page as it existed AT THE TIME I TAGGED IT, before leaving your comment. _{(Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and I am not a psychic, and can not and will not be held responsible for actions that occurred after the fact).}

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5

This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by .

Thanks

Thanks for cleaning up what I meant to do at Union Pacific Big Boy -- I'm using a new Watchlist tool, which I like, but I haven't quite got the hang of the way it presents history, so I reverted too much. Sorry. . . Jim - Jameslwoodward (talk to me • contribs) 13:26, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth McCarthy

Hi. I have declined your speedy on this one, as I think there is enough here to pass A7, and I have been advising the newbie author who has been through a trying loop of BLPprod - copyvio - deleted - REFUND - copyvio again with intent to rewrite but zapped again - new version, BLPprod plus A7. I will keep an eye on it and get it referenced; it may end up at PROD/AfD but we'll give it a chance. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:55, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Ivo Gamulin Gianni

Hello Wuhwuzdat. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Ivo Gamulin Gianni, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Ϣere SpielChequers 18:10, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital

Thank you for looking over the Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital Wiki Page. I am still very new to Wikipedia so please be patient with me while I am still learning. I apologize if my edits violated any rules of being "a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion". Those were not my intentions nor will they ever be. I tried my best to compose a page within Wikipedia's standards by linking and sourcing as much as possible to prove verifiability. I guess I over did it. I am also not totally clear about the rules, as I see many similar organizations on Wikipedia posting similar type of information as I did for SRH. Also, I am sure not all of my edits violated the rules. I thought it was unnecessary to delete all my edits.

It would be greatly appreciated if you could look over my edits and make specific edits of your own, so it the page will comply with Wikipedia standards and be informational to the general public as well. Thank you for your time and consideration. PaintingOfViolets (talk) 18:02, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about deleting "All" your edits, but the reversion tool I use does not allow partial reverts. But lets be honest, searching for non-advertising material in your additions would have been like searching for a needle in a haystack. Perhaps it may be time to tell your bosses that Wikipedia is NOT an advertising media, and to expend their efforts elsewhere. As for the "many similar organizations on Wikipedia posting similar type of information as you did for SRH.", if you would kindly point me in their direction, I'd be happy to trim the Spam out of them. I would like to point out the guidelines explained at WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS, for further explanation of why that sort of argument doesn't work here. I'd also like to re-remind you of WP:COI, due to the fact that you are OBVIOUSLY the same user as the previous COI editor from your organization. WuhWuzDat 20:57, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tetovo

It seems your bot has reverted some perfectly good edits on the Tetovo article? Capricornis (talk) 18:55, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't own a bot. WuhWuzDat 20:33, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The edits I reverted were a copyright violation, as stated in my edit summary. WuhWuzDat 20:36, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And to be precise, the information removed from the Tetovo article was the exact same information deleted (as a copyvio) from a standalone article at The Painted Mosque. WuhWuzDat 20:39, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I thought there was nothings wrong with the text because there was nothing nationalistic or scandalous in it, but if you say it was copy/paste from somewhere then I will take your word for it :) Capricornis (talk) 01:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nigel Tollerman article

Hi there, you recently speedy tagged this article and I agreed with your tag and deleted it. However I have restored the article after the originating editor approached me and I trawled through its slightly complicated history. I've summarised this at the article's talk page and given my reasons why I still think the subject is non-notable. If you feel like giving your opinion there I would value your views. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 23:06, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging a little late.

I notice in the case of the user RailCommTechComm, you tagged it as a possible COI when the account was already blocked. Don't you think there should be a template setting that causes the action to halt if the user is blocked? mechamind 9 0 23:19, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]