Jump to content

User talk:DeadlyAssassin

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has rollback rights on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 144.177.50.6 (talk) at 11:24, 10 October 2011 (→‎Stonewall Defense / Defence). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Speedy Deletion of article on Jeremiah Choy

The article on Jeremiah Choy has relevent references cited. It should not be proposed for speedy deletion. The article is linked to the Singapore portal where his name is listed.

See Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Singapore-related_topics#Singaporean_directors_and_groups

Jamesjordantay (talk) 10:35, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • No problem. Check this out for how to do redirects WP:REDIRECT, what you did looked like an article with just a single reference. I've copied the content over to the article with the correct name i.e. Choy instead of choy and redirected from the lower case article to the main one. I'll now delete your CSD comments in case the create any confusion. --Deadly∀ssassin 10:46, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! There were 2 references to the article. One in the Straits Times (which is a printed paper in Singapore) and the other one is an online references. If you search Jeremiah Choy online, there are many articles with his name on it. The reason why I did not put in the online references is that the Wiki guidelines says that online references are not so ideal as a source if information. However, many of the printed articles are placed online these days. As such, I did not place the references for fear of speedy deletion. Thank you for putting the Captital C in Choy. Jamesjordantay (talk) 02:33, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tdp facebook

Hello DeadlyAssassin. I have nominated the redirect for deletion, as I think it is an implausible redirect which contains no valuable encyclopedic information, see [1]. It was repeatedly recreated as a political advert of User:TDP Facebook, an account with no other purpose than promoting the Facebook page of the Telugu Desam Party. I blocked the account for spamming. Please let me know if you disagree with my action. Thank you. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 10:09, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Suicide

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Suicide. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 05:36, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So what's up with automatically reverting edits by IP users?

Friendly's hasn't been publicly traded for years, and is owned by a private equity firm. The article was years out of date, which is why I edited it. In the future, please do some research before reverting quality edits. Not all IP users are noobs, you know.

I see that you've realized your mistake, and reinstated my edit. While I appreciate this, I think an apology is certainly called for.

76.119.75.131 (talk) 09:25, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


You've really got no comment as to why you just revert people's quality edits for no reason? 76.119.75.131 (talk) 09:35, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply] 

"editors who misuse standard rollback (for example, by using it to reverse good-faith edits in situations where an explanatory edit summary would normally be expected) may have their rollback rights removed. Since rollback is part of the core administrator tools, an admin could theoretically be desysopped in order to remove those tools."

Just in case you'd forgotten not to abuse your powers. 76.119.75.131 (talk) 09:48, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


So do you have any response? 76.119.75.131 (talk) 10:01, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

I blame the physics of Huggle on that one... It shouldn't have rolled over your edit and 76.119.75.131 in one edit, regardless, or maybe I'm just too tired, I don't know. I am kind of curious what 76.119.75.131 is talking about though although without diffs it's hard to tell. Crazynas t 10:12, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • All good, Huggle can get away from you at times. The story is I made this (Huggle :)) edit [2] accidentally, realised it was a mistake [3], and before I could reverse the edit I received this [4]. I've not engaged with the IP editor since. --Deadly∀ssassin 10:17, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Indeed, you reverted in the same server minute looks to me like, so I don't know what the big deal is. Although misuse of rollback (although reverting oneself is pretty close to saying sorry) I feel calls for apology, civility is required when requesting it. Crazynas t 10:50, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Couldn't agree more. I'd pressed escape in Huggle to cancel the warning edit, and it said that the edit was cancelled, so at the time I didn't even bother to look at the users talk page. I guess I should know by now that Huggle doesn't always report correctly. --Deadly∀ssassin 11:20, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stonewall Defense / Defence

Thanks very much for the guidance on the redirect. I realised a little too late that it's actually the Stonewall Attack I was referring to - the Defence is an extension of the Dutch Defense.

Cheers 144.177.50.6 (talk) 10:18, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do not put requests for deletion of personal information on wp:AN

AN has a big header at the top, which contains the following sentence:

  • Permanent deletion of sensitive personal information → requests for oversight. DO NOT make such requests here; reports here are visible to everyone.

Thank you for reporting the issue, but next time please contact oversight directly rather than posting in a public place such wp:AN. I will contact oversight now. Yoenit (talk) 10:51, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DeadlyAssassin&oldid=454854808"