User talk:Kirov Airship

I have blocked you indefinitely for two reasons:

You are running an unapproved bot see here.
Your bot script posted the password in the above diff and therefore your account is compromised --Chris 02:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've unblocked you, please read Wikipedia:Security and please do not run any more bots unless they have been approved --Chris 10:43, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Kirov Airship (talk) 10:48, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Compishco

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Compishco, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.martianimation.com/pages/compishco.asp. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 11:58, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Compishco

A tag has been placed on Compishco requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Largo Plazo (talk) 12:01, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Compishco, a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Largo Plazo (talk) 12:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish language article

Please do not undo other people's edits repeatedly and marking them as vandalism, as you are doing in Turkish language, or you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. The three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the 3RR. Also, the reason that I have not removed Nagorno-Karabakh from the Armenian language article is that I do not watch that article. Thank you. Kman543210 (talk) 17:20, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have violated the three-revert rule on Turkish language. Any administrator may now choose to block your account. In the future, please make an effort to discuss your changes further, instead of edit warring. Kman543210 (talk) 00:09, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

December 2008

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 12 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for engaging in an edit war at Turkish language. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Blueboy 96 17:24, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Minetest-c55

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Minetest-c55, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://91.155.42.12/~celeron55/minetest.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 23:47, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Minetest-c55

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Minetest-c55 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. doomgaze (talk) 00:05, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Speedy at Minetest-c55

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Minetest-c55, a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion notice, which will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 00:07, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with this edit to Minetest-c55. Please use the {{hangon}} template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion, and make your case on the page's talk page. Thank you. RA0808 (talk) 00:11, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Kirov Airship. You have new messages at RA0808's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

RA0808 (talk) 00:30, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm old user than you. I know what I'm doing. --Kirov Airship (talk) 00:32, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Minecraft. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 00:51, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Infiniminer. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 01:19, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

what about you are talking? give me are source or remove that nonesense from here--Kirov Airship (talk) 01:23, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See edit history - I count four reverts by you (the initial edit counts as one). Regardless of the issue, edit-warring in a content dispute is never acceptable. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 01:25, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And whom edit was accepted by you? Mine. --Kirov Airship (talk) 01:29, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The resolution of the content dispute is irrelevant. Edit warring is a bright-line offense, and can result in a block regardless of whose edit is ultimately chosen. See Wikipedia:Edit warring. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 01:52, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Reverting vandalism is not edit warring" See, I was dealing with vandalism. --Kirov Airship (talk) 01:56, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, it was a content dispute - there is a difference. The edits were clearly not vandalism as defined at Wikipedia:Vandalism. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 01:58, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It didn't seem so. --Kirov Airship (talk) 02:00, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just keep 3RR in mind in the future. You didn't continue to revert after the warning, and discussed the issue, so there's no reason for a block now. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 02:06, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Infiniminer

just FYI - if the article remains unsourced, it will be deleted. please find evidence of mainstream coverage of the game if you want the article to stay. thanks. Kaini (talk) 01:25, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Infiniminer.png

Thanks for uploading File:Infiniminer.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 03:06, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of InfiniMiner

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on InfiniMiner, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 06:01, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Infiniminer

Please do not re-create Infiniminer article, as the last articles for deletion discussion resulted in delete. The article should only be re-created if you can demonstrate notability of the subject, which does not appear to have changed since October 2010, as the game is no longer in development. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 11:21, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not act like you do not understand why the page is being redirected, as you've been reverted by at least 4 different editors and had discussions with them on the topic. The game is not notable on it's own. ferret (talk) 11:55, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This remains non-notable. If you desire to contest it, use the Talk page. Don't simply remove the tag without reason. "It's not miencraft" is not a reason. ferret (talk) 12:03, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, you are the one that do not uses the talk page. I've already stated to you on ypur talk page and in the game's talk page why it should not be redierected to Minecraft. --Kirov Airship (talk) 12:06, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from pages that you have created yourself, as you did with this edit to Infiniminer. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. ScottSteiner ✍ 12:11, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing

Wikipedia works by consensus. Your recent editing relating to Minecraft and InfiniMiner indicates that you are willing to try to push your own versions through even in the face of clear consensus against you. This has manifested itself in many ways, including edit warring at both Minecraft and InfiniMiner, and repeatedly recreating an article which had been deleted following a consensus at a deletion discussion that its subject was not notable enough to justify an article. You have even written "the Inifiniminer link was redirected to Minecraft again and agin by many wiki user". In other words you were yourself stating that there is a consensus in favour of teh redirect, and yet you continued to remove that redirect. Please do not continue to try to unilaterally overturn consensus, nor to edit war, otherwise unfortunately there is a good chance you will be blocked from editing. One more point: You have been continually protesting that Minecraft and InfiniMiner are not the same. As far as I am aware, nobody has suggested that they are. Following the decision that InfiniMiner was not notable enough to warrant its own article, it was reasonable to create a redirect to the one place on English Wikipedia where InfiniMiner is mentioned, so that anyone searching for information about InfiniMiner will at least find what little information we have on the subject. The redirect does not imply that the two are the same thing. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:32, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The new redirect is not correct. There should not be direct to that section. Search alredy redirects it to Minecraft page. --Kirov Airship (talk) 13:38, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Using the "Search" box produces a link to Minecraft, because, as I said, that is the one place on English Wikipedia where InfiniMiner is mentioned. However, there are more ways than that of searching for information in Wikipedia. Anyway, all I did was restore what was agreed on by other editors following the deletion discussion. I have no personal view on the matter at all. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:04, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good, now we cannot see the history. Duh... --Kirov Airship (talk) 16:17, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Заявка за блокране

Пуснах молба за вашето блокиране заради премахване на външна препратка към полезен и информативен сайт без никакви реални аргументи и редакторска война.--Алиса Селезньова (talk) 13:23, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please use English in English Wikipedia. --Kirov Airship (talk) 14:02, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Sebihan Mehmed

Hi, I'm Wakowako. Kirov Airship, thanks for creating Sebihan Mehmed!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. No evidence of notability

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

December 2012

Hello, I'm Lugia2453. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made to Turkish genocide, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, Lugia2453 (talk) 21:47, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to your message: I undid your edit because you put it up for speedy deletion under the G10 criteria (attack page or negative unsourced BLP), which it didn't fit the criteria for. If the titles and links under the article truly aren't related as you said, you should talk about it in the article's talk page. Lugia2453 (talk) 21:52, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Comparison of web application frameworks may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:54, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Laravel (framework)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Laravel (framework), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. MrOllie (talk) 12:52, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the confusing reply on my talk page. I got confused about who was writing to me. I had actually moved the article to User:Siconize/Laravel (framework) instead of to your user space because that editor made most of the edits to the article. If you want me to move it to your space, let me know. ~Amatulić (talk) 14:39, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Caller ID App

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Caller ID App, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Jackmcbarn (talk) 00:03, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Speedy at Caller ID App

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for taking the time to create a page here. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you created yourself. Because Wikipedia policy does not allow the creator of the page to remove deletion tags, an automated program has replaced the deletion tag you removed from Caller ID App. Please do not continue to remove the deletion tag, instead, if you disagree with the deletion, you can follow these steps:

Go to the page by clicking this link. Once there, select the button that says Click here to contest this speedy deletion.
This will take you to the talk page, where you can make your case by explaining why the page does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion.

Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do. For further help about the deletion, you could contact the user who first placed the tag or a highly active user who is willing to help with deletion. This message was left by a bot, so please do not contact the bot about the deletion. Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 00:05, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Caller ID App. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 00:05, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you remove a speedy deletion notice from a page you have created yourself, as you did at Caller ID App, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 00:06, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reported to AIV

Hi Kirov Airship, this is a notice to let you know that I have reported your removal of speedy deletion templates at Caller ID App to administrators. An administrator should assess the report in a short while, and they will take any appropriate actions. Please wait for an administrator before taking any further actions yourself. Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 00:08, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Daniel Case (talk) 00:11, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Slim Framework

The article Slim Framework has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced. Doesn't meet WP:GNG, see also WP:NSOFT

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 00:16, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Kirov Airship, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Slim Framework, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 00:18, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Adaffix

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Adaffix, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. FunPika 00:21, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your use of multiple Wikipedia accounts

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kirov Airship, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Jackmcbarn (talk) 17:28, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of OSQA

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on OSQA requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Pointillist (talk) 22:39, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Shapado

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Shapado requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Pointillist (talk) 22:39, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding .voting

Hi there. We appreciate your contribution on .voting. However, it would be great if you added more information to the page using reliable sources; you can see our notability guidelines for more information. Thanks again for the contribution. :) I hope you keep writing articles. EmilyREditor (talk) 02:03, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .ninja

The article .ninja has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:38, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .cards

The article .cards has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:38, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .archi

The article .archi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:39, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .best

The article .best has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .land

The article .land has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .dance

The article .dance has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .cheap

The article .cheap has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:41, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .coffee

The article .coffee has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:41, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .camera

The article .camera has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:43, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .link

The article .link has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:43, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .center

The article .center has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:43, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .voting

The article .voting has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:43, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .events

The article .events has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:43, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .uno

The article .uno has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:43, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .rich

The article .rich has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:43, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .glass

The article .glass has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:43, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .moda

The article .moda has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is a whole set of these generic top level domains with their own pages, none of which have any meaningful content. A stronger approach would be to merge into the existing page for generic top-level domains as a list unless any of these new domains gains any material coverage or notoriety unique to it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 08:43, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve .house

Hi, I'm Staglit. Kirov Airship, thanks for creating .house!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Hello! Do you happen to know what .house is used for? that could be helpful for your recent article.

Thanks for your recent edits! Staglit (talk) 15:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Staglit (talk) 15:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .bargains

Hello, Kirov Airship. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, .bargains, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

edit the page
remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Staglit (talk) 18:12, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about .lighting

Hello, Kirov Airship,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether .lighting should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/.lighting .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Staglit (talk) 00:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about .meet

Hello, Kirov Airship,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether .meet should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/.meet .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Staglit (talk) 00:13, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about .miami

Hello, Kirov Airship,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether .miami should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/.miami .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Staglit (talk) 00:13, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about .mango

Hello, Kirov Airship,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether .mango should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/.mango .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Staglit (talk) 00:14, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kirov Airship,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether .menu should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/.menu .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Staglit (talk) 00:14, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop creating articles about TLDs until you can demonstrate they pass WP:GNG

It's an established principle that the subjects of Wikipedia articles must pass the test for WP:NOTABILITY in order to be kept. The fact that ICANN has created these domains is not enough, of itself, to demonstrate that they are notable. Now TLDs are easy to get, they have in effect become no more scarce, or notable, than any other expensive common-word domain name. You will need to provide evidence that they pass the notability guidelines, or people will just keep on redirecting or deleting them until you do. -- The Anome (talk) 18:43, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you'd like to do some research, and create those articles one by one, following policy for each, you're welcome to do so.

Until then, please stop reverting my, or any other editor's, changes of these article to redirects. Once you can cite multiple, independent, reliable sources to demonstrate that these TLDs are indeed notable as required by the Wikipedia WP:NOTABILITY policy, you're welcome to restore them to being standalone articles, and you should be able to be confident that they will be kept, also as per policy. Otherwise, as I said above, other editors will just keep on redirecting or deleting them until you do so, or until you end up being blocked for disruptive editing. -- The Anome (talk) 23:36, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Last and previous year I was trying to create the Laravel (framework) page but the mods kept it deleting even though I have showed from Google trends that the search term for it increased steadily and that in Github PHP trends it was on the top places. I think that the mods do not know how notable those things are and thus keep deleting them even when I show notability sources. Now, for the new gTLDs the IANA pages are enough to show that these pages are notable. Well, if you say that a .ninja is not enough let me show you are random village is much less notable than the .ninja. Will we delete the village pages and keep the gTLDs? --Kirov Airship (talk) 14:40, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Arguing that the rules don't apply to you, or attempting to justify notability by making comparisons with other things, is not going to help your case. There is long standing community consensus that some classes of things like villages, high schools, railway stations have "inherent notability": these are special cases, grandfathered in by community consensus, that allows lower evidence standards for these classes of articles.

Otherwise, notability, as used in this context, is defined by the rules in WP:NOTABILITY, not by your own ideas of what is and isn't notable, and certainly not defined by web hits or popularity trackers of any sort. If the article meets those criteria, it gets put in. If not, it gets deleted or redirected. (Note that notability is not a once-and-for-all thing. Something may be non-notable, then multiple WP:RS are written about it, and it becomes notable.) As far as I can see, there is no special notability policy for domains, so WP:GNG applies. You have so far made no attempt to add any sources to the article that show that .ninja meets the criteria given there.

Now, if you were to find, say, two or preferably three or more, news stories specifically about the .ninja domain (not just general stories about new TLDs that mention it in passing), from independent third party sources that meet WP:RS, and cite them in the article as sources, you'd have established notability for that article, and we can all stop complaining about it. If you can do the same for every other new TLD, no-one will complain about that either, and you'll be able to keep those articles too. -- The Anome (talk) 21:50, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removing AfD template

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with .lighting. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message from a bot about this edit, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 02:14, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removing AfD template

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with .mango. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. This is an automated message from a bot about this edit, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 02:14, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removing AfD template

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to remove Articles for deletion notices or comments from articles and Articles for deletion pages, as you did at .meet, you may be blocked from editing. This is an automated message from a bot about this edit, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 02:14, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removing AfD template

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove an Articles for deletion notice or a comment from an AfD discussion, as you did at .menu. This is an automated message from a bot about this edit, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 02:15, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting won't improve anything. People will look for .menu and will find nothing. Better you redirect instead of deleting it. --Kirov Airship (talk) 11:50, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

.ninja

There's no point in making a "test page for notability." Page hits are irrelevant, since the relevant policy is WP:N. You can satisfy this policy by citing the assertions in the article to multiple verifiable independent third-party sources that discuss the article's subject as the primary topic of the cited article. If you can do this, the article can be kept. If not, not. Please note that ICANN is not an independent source, nor is the sponsoring company itself, and while things written by these companies (eg. web pages, database entries, announcements) these can be cited in the article, they do not count towards establishing notability for the purposes of WP:N. See WP:CITE, WP:V and WP:RS for more on how to do this. -- The Anome (talk) 10:57, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Siconize/Laravel (framework)

User:Siconize/Laravel (framework), a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Siconize/Laravel (framework) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Siconize/Laravel (framework) during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:58, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 60 hours for continually removing AfD notices from articles, despite repeatedly being warned that doing so is unacceptable. You are perfectly free to give your reasons for opposing deletion in the discussion pages, but ignoring the discussions and unilaterally taking action is unacceptable. It prevents other editors from being aware of the discussions, and so limits the range of editors able to participate. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:07, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Kirov Airship (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have created new generic top level domains. Then some people thought that the pages I have created are not notable pages and they have redirected some of them and others were replaced with "delete this article". I have added some information to the pages and I have removed either the redirect or "delete this". Then the bots told me that I should not remove the "delete this". I said to myself "I'm giving up", I'll redirect the pages with "delete this" and I'll not contribute to the new generic top level domains. Then I've redirected the last few gTLDs but then they have blocked me. Those pages were already going to be redirected to Generic top-level domain#New top-level domains. So this blocking is made without thought.

Decline reason:

Per below. — Daniel Case (talk) 15:57, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

The block was not "made without thought" at all: it was made after very careful thought. When an article is subject to a deletion discussion, it is not acceptable to remove the AfD notice. You may have decided to settle for replacing the articles by redirects, but other editors have the right to express their opinions and take part in the discussion. By removing the notices, you prevent editors from seeing that the articles are subject to deletion, and thereby you deprive them of the opportunity of taking part, and perhaps suggesting an outcome different from the one you have decided on. There are four messages on this page telling you not to remove AfD notices, including one telling you that doing so again might lead to an immediate block, and yet you did so again on all four of the articles concerned after receiving that message and replying to it. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:34, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Then can you explain why .menu, .miami, .mango, .meet all have "delete this" request while .ninja, .onl, .lighting, .link, .glass, .cheap, .rich, .center, .cards, .wiki, .best, .voting, .coffee, .futbol, .dance, .uno, .photos, .social, .email, .education and so on all have redirects? What is so special about .miami, .menu, mango, .meet? It's because all the "delete this" articles start with M. Nothing special. And last time what I did was to redirect the .menu, .mango, .meet like other users redirected it, to .ninja#New_top-level_domains. It is not as same as just deleting the "delete this" notification. If you want to delete those articles go on and delete them, I'm the creator of these articles and I demand them to be deleted. No one wants to keep them, please go on and delete them. After you delete them I'll create them again I'll make redirect to .ninja#New_top-level_domains so that since because they are like the rest new gTLDs better they follow the same thing. --144.122.250.185 (talk) 18:32, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The length of the block has been increased by three days, because you have evaded the block by editing without logging in. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 18:40, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And can you plase answer my question? Instead of getting offended. --Kirov Airship (talk) 18:45, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also there is no rule that I should be blocked for three days just because I defended myself! --Kirov Airship (talk) 18:49, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Kirov Airship (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

The initial block was unfair. It is based on no rule. It does not meet the rules "Disruptive editing". It is not welcoming action. The only reason that I have been give +3 days block is that JamesBWatson has been offended, not because "disruptive editing". Here I'm trying to contribute to WikiPedia but what I get is block over block. See above, JamesBWatson didn't answer to my question, he choose to add +3 days block.

Decline reason:

You can continue to lament that the last block was "unfair", but that block has been reviewed and found to be sound. The block was not extended because you defended yourself, the block was extended because you violated Wikipedia policy by evading your block. In order for an unblock to be considered you will need to demonstrate that you understand why you were blocked and explain how you will avoid the same issues if you were to be unblocked. Pointing fingers at others will not bring you the results you desire. Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 19:08, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

The IP is not SOCK

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Kirov Airship (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

you said that I have used an IP to avoid block but this is far from reality. If you look at the IP you will see that I use http://www.ip-adress.com/ip_tracer/144.122.250.185 PC lab computer. When I was contributing with the IP I had no idea that this action could be labeled as suckpupetary. Also there işt says "Logging out to make problematic edits as an IP address", this does not apply to me because if you look to my 6 hours ago logs you will see that I have used a PC lab computer from Phisics department. Now I use PC lab computer from Dorm 2 computer. I don't carry portable Firefox to keep me logged in. When I log on to Windows I get clear new Windows profile. Moreover sock is this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sockenpuppentanz2.jpg HIDING YOURSELF, the idea is to hide yourself. I was not hiding myself.

Decline reason:

Per Ponyo's link below. Yunshui ^雲 _水 19:45, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You made this edit while blocked. That is block evasion, which is prohibited. This is why your block was extended.--Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 19:31, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No answer? To the user who have blocked me?

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Kirov Airship (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Then can you explain why .menu, .miami, .mango, .meet all have "delete this" request while .ninja, .onl, .lighting, .link, .glass, .cheap, .rich, .center, .cards, .wiki, .best, .voting, .coffee, .futbol, .dance, .uno, .photos, .social, .email, .education and so on all have redirects? What is so special about .miami, .menu, mango, .meet? It's because all the "delete this" articles start with M. Nothing special. And last time what I did was to redirect the .menu, .mango, .meet like other users redirected it, to .ninja#New_top-level_domains. It is not as same as just deleting the "delete this" notification. If you want to delete those articles go on and delete them. I'm the creator of the articles and please go on delete them. There is no one who wants to keep them.

Decline reason:

Not an unblock request. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 22:34, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

As you know, you have yet again evaded your block by editing without logging in. In light of all the things which are written above on this page, you must have expected and intended that this would lead to a further extension of the block, and that is indeed so. What is more, you used your block evasion to repost a message to my talk page which you had previously posted, and which I had removed. That is borderline harassment. If you continue in this way, the next block may well be indefinite. Also, if you continue to misuse talk page access, as you did for example in your last "unblock request", which was not an unblock request at all, your talk page access is likely to be removed, to prevent you from wasting further administrator time. I also suggest that if you want to know why some of your articles are nominated for deletion and not others, the best way to find out is to wait until the block is over and then ask the editors who made the deletion nominations. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 07:49, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You have misused your administrative right for harassment to me and other users. --Kirov Airship (talk) 10:54, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Also, your answer shows that this block was done without thinking, you have acted like a robot. --Kirov Airship (talk) 10:58, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The one who is harnessing here is you. I wanted an answer and you not also blocked me for this but also didn't answer. In the next elections I hope that you won't a moderator and be blocked for these kind of actions. --Kirov Airship (talk) 11:00, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited .bar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ICC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

June 2014

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Rain, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 12:09, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .bar

The article .bar has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

NN

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Be..anyone (talk) 05:29, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of .foo

The article .foo has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

NN

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Be..anyone (talk) 05:33, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bosphorus Bridge

Anonymous editors keep imposing the new name instead of the common and simple Bosphorus Bridge . To make things even more weird, they put the Turkish name in front and in bold even though this is the English Wikipedia and an average English speaking user wouldn't even have some of the letters to write 15 Temmuz Şehitler Köprüsü. I think the page should be protected, I simply don't see any other way. I can't see the new name of the bridge catching on either. --Killuminator (talk) 00:21, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Tomorrow I'll propose for a protection https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection --Kirov Airship (talk) 22:08, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Compishco

Speedy deletion of Compishco

September 2008

Turkish language article

December 2008

Minetest-c55

Speedy deletion nomination of Minetest-c55

Removing Speedy at Minetest-c55

April 2011

Talkback

April 2011

Infiniminer

License tagging for File:Infiniminer.png

Speedy deletion nomination of InfiniMiner

Infiniminer

Your recent editing

Заявка за блокране

Ways to improve Sebihan Mehmed

December 2012

June 2013

Speedy deletion nomination of Laravel (framework)

Speedy deletion nomination of Caller ID App

Removing Speedy at Caller ID App

Reported to AIV

Proposed deletion of Slim Framework

Welcome!

Speedy deletion nomination of Adaffix

Your use of multiple Wikipedia accounts

Speedy deletion nomination of OSQA

Speedy deletion nomination of Shapado

Regarding .voting

Proposed deletion of .ninja

Proposed deletion of .cards

Proposed deletion of .archi

Proposed deletion of .best

Proposed deletion of .land

Proposed deletion of .dance

Proposed deletion of .cheap

Proposed deletion of .coffee

Proposed deletion of .camera

Proposed deletion of .link

Proposed deletion of .center

Proposed deletion of .voting

Proposed deletion of .events

Proposed deletion of .uno

Proposed deletion of .rich

Proposed deletion of .glass

Proposed deletion of .moda

Ways to improve .house

Proposed deletion of .bargains

Deletion discussion about .lighting

Deletion discussion about .meet

Deletion discussion about .miami

Deletion discussion about .mango

Deletion discussion about .menu

Please stop creating articles about TLDs until you can demonstrate they pass WP:GNG

Removing AfD template

Removing AfD template

Removing AfD template

Removing AfD template

.ninja

MfD nomination of User:Siconize/Laravel (framework)

The IP is not SOCK

No answer? To the user who have blocked me?

Disambiguation link notification for May 7

June 2014

Proposed deletion of .bar

Proposed deletion of .foo

ArbCom elections are now open!

Bosphorus Bridge