User talk:49ersBelongInSanFrancisco

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Thanks for noticing the duplication[edit]

A small cup of coffee.JPG Hey, I saw that you deleted the duplicate article that i posted and wanted to thank you noticing its redundancy!

(I apologize if I'm not using this correctly, I never used this feature before). The Red Rat Writer (talk) 06:34, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 17:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

IPs similar to[edit]

Hey man, while adding those vandalism templates to pages like this is certainly standard procedure, if you see this automated vandalism with similar edit summaries, feel free to just report to AIV with a link to Special:AbuseFilter/815. Cheers, GFOLEY FOUR!— 09:04, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Economic importance of bacteria[edit]

I'm terribly sorry, we had an edit conflict just now, stimulated by your absolutely correct observations on this article: I didn't mean to tread on you. I've suggested a way ahead on the talk page; there is more than enough work here for everyone. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:44, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

You asked what else there was to do; the main task is surely to add citations to the uncited material. As that is done, new materials will certainly come to light. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:56, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
For improving Wheels For Wishes, a highly misleading ADVERT before you made the effort to write - and source - it right. E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:10, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted[edit]

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

  • URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog (around 18,000 pages) down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
  • Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
  • Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:51, 2 April 2017 (UTC)


I am certain this can be expanded into an article; there have been many articles and essays about this phenomenon beyond defining it. I de-prodded it. Bearian (talk) 18:13, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Kelly leonard[edit]

Hello 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Kelly leonard, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: previously declined. Do not retag pages an admin already declined. Doing so can be considered admin-shopping. Thank you. SoWhy 08:51, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Deletion Of "List Of Gaming Computers"[edit]

Can I Hide The Article And Edit It? N64 Gamer 500 (talk) 15:31, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

@N64 Gamer 500: I appreciate your willingness to edit the article. It looks like you have improved it, but I don't know that it is appropriate subject matter for an encyclopedia no matter how much energy you put into it. I don't want you to waste your time on an article that might not be sustainable, so I'm going to put it up for discussion now so that there's a definite judgment one way or the other. Thanks for checking in! 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 06:46, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Response to Your Message[edit]

Hi there, I'm not sure if this is the right way to leave a message, but I hope I'm doing the right thing. You have message me with regards to a section that I removed from a Wiki page. The reason is that I do not believe the events mentioned are correct and best representative to the truth. I have the feeling that whoever wrote these sections is/are only trying to give themselves some exposure and promotion at the expense of truth. I'm not sure if removing the section was the best thing to do, but I believe that when some individuals' names are mentioned in an incorrect manner, sections like those should not be up. Please let me know what you think. Sincerely.

I also apologize for having removed the sections again. I did that before noticing your message. Thank you.

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by SophieTrophie (talkcontribs) 08:10, 8 April 2017 (UTC) 
@SophieTrophie: Hi SophieTrophie, thanks for sharing your concerns. In general, it is frowned upon to delete large sections of a Wikipedia article without explanation. When there's no explanation it's impossible to know if you deleted a large section by accident, because you simply didn't like it, or because it was incorrect. If you have a more balanced perspective that is backed by independent sources, I'd strongly encourage you to edit the page and incorporate those new sources. If you think the whole section is not correct, you can give an explanation in your edit summary message (the box below the editing window) or you can take the discussion to the article's talk page (Talk:Student_Federation_of_the_University_of_Ottawa). Thanks!49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 10:31, 8 April 2017 (UTC)


(Move log); 07:28 . . 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk | contribs) moved page Benutzer:Die freiburgerin/Artikelentwurf to Perfect PDF Premium ‎(Moving to article name)

Benutzer is German for User. I'd moved the previous version to User:Die freiburgerin/Artikelentwurf, It's starting to look like Die freiburgerin isn't interested in following advice. Cabayi (talk) 09:10, 11 April 2017 (UTC)