User talk:Widr

This is Widr's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72: 1 days

Edits

Hello Widr,

Looking over your page here it appears to be the case that you are often in disagreements with other Wiki editors because you edit their own submissions without cooperating with them. This is exactly what you did with my comment at the Celilo Falls Wiki entry. I'm going to put my entry back into the article because it was factually accurate and written with appropriate register. There is nothing wrong with pointing out what anybody from the Columbia river region know all too well: there are very many people from all walks of life who want Celilo Falls back and the dam removed, regardless of your own sadly evident and counter productive personal political biases. It's a shame there are people like you on Wikipedia trying to interfere with other people's submissions.

Dear Widr,

how are you? Disruptive editing? It is my page. You have now reverted an article draft 3x after the article was rejected, in our opinion, for no concrete reason as the article was well supported and got the green light from your peers prior to submission. Please refrain from putting materials back that have been rejected as "having issues" Please advise.

You have also written that I am not able to blanket out since I am not the sole author. Who else is an author? Kstar 1 (talk) 16:12, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kstar 1 (talk • contribs) 16:00, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Kstar 1: Yes, you created the article, but you do not own it. There have been other editors fixing the article since you created it, and that's why you cannot simply blank it. You can, however, propose it for deletion if you feel that the concerns raised are beyond repair. Widr (talk) 16:51, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kenneth Waller

I'm the same person as Grand Slam AF; sorry to be pestering you, if you think I am, but, like I said, the way you didn't appreciate what I added - 'No explanation has ever been offered as to the cause of his death' (of course, this is regarding Kenneth Waller, as you can see in the subject) - is possibly because, on Wikipedia, we don't say what we don't know, only what we do know, and you'd ask 'how would I prove that anyway? I see his death certificate?'Ofcdeadbeat (talk) 23:02, 20 June 2014 (UTC)Ofcdeadbeat[reply]

Already replied. Widr (talk) 23:09, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Undertire8

Does this mean I won't be allowed to make a Wikipedia page about my site? I just want notoriety and I thought I could get it here. Can I make a page without violating the Terms and Conditions? Can I do it without being accused of using Wikipedia to advertise? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Undertire8 (talk • contribs) 20:06, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Undertire8: You shouldn't do that if you don't want to get blocked. Please read WP:NOTADVERTISING. Widr (talk) 20:17, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But stuff like Smosh and Cinemasins get Wikipedia articles; that kinda seems like advertising. What rules do they not break that I do? Explain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Undertire8 (talk • contribs) 20:30, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SPIP applies here. Widr (talk) 04:31, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are you paying any attention? Do I have permission to make an article about my site? Undertire8 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.75.61.58 (talk) 05:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the link above? That should have answered your question. Widr (talk) 05:40, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Website stuff on Wikipedia. Too late — Preceding unsigned comment added by Undertire8 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Widr

could you show me how avoid vandalize when refrreing an article as disputed and still discussed in talks?

regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reer Woqooyi (talk • contribs) 19:46, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Reer Woqooyi: You can continue the discussion on the talk page of the article, but you cannot remove content from the actual article unless there is a consensus to do so. Also, additional notes (such as "Disputed check talk pages") do not belong to the article.Widr (talk) 19:54, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]