User talk:Aromavic

Spikequeen (talk) 07:15, 3 September 2014 (UTC)Dear Aromavic, Amanda Eliasch's page, is a credible artist from the UK and writer, there is no advertising. It was set up by credible editors.In fact there is a lot more out there about her which is not on the page. What's your problem with the article? Please remove the alert there are a few editors working on the pageSpikequeen (talk) 07:15, 3 September 2014 (UTC)spikequeenSpikequeen (talk) 07:15, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding speedy deletion templates back to the Amanda Eliasch article. It has been challenged now by two editors who were not the original author, as per the wording of the template "If this article does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice". If you have a problem with the article, please explain the issue on the Talk page or take it to AfD. It clearly isn't an A7 candidate because it makes clear claims of awards and recognition. To be honest, I can't see any promotion or advertising either. Sionk (talk) 23:22, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have reported you to an admin for your continual unconstructive edits on the Amanda Eliasch page. Is that the sole reason you have started a new account. You clearly have no history here of editing anything else, and you are a very new user. DinkyExpress (talk) 00:06, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am reporting you to the admin for continual negativity on theAmanda Eliasch. There is no advertising, and all is backed by prominent press, so unless you wish to state what your real problem is, why not help? Spikequeen (talk) 17:35, 4 September 2014 (UTC)spikequeenSpikequeen (talk) 17:35, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Malformed AfD of Amanda Eliasch

I think the editor just does not like the subject, yet the subject has achieved a lot, perhaps they should check some of the work before deleting her yet again. I have read about her for three days, she has achieved much more than a lot of articles that are not nagged. There is a lot out there that is not in the article. The editor seems to have opened to the account with the intention of deleting the article without really giving reasons why. It has credible editors. I am very new, but the rest have awards. So looks weird. Spikequeen (talk) 18:41, 4 September 2014 (UTC)spikequeenSpikequeen (talk) 18:41, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've had to remove the AfD nomination from the top of the Amanda Eliasch article, as there was no actual nomination and the link ("Amanda Eliasch (6th nomination)") was clearly nonsensical. Please read WP:AFDHOWTO carefully before submitting a new request. Favonian (talk) 17:07, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is not gonna end well. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amanda Eliasch (6th nomination) is nowhere close to meeting the requirements for an AfD nomination. Even the title is wrong, as there has only been one previous nomination, to wit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amanda Eliasch. Either make submit a proper nomination, or drop the stick. Favonian (talk) 17:12, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Why are you attacking the Amanda Eliasch article? Biboobi (talk) 21:15, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Amanda Eliasch. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Stop attaching maintenance tags that clearly violate consensus among the numerous editors who have contributed to this article. Your visceral hostility to Ms. Eliasch is noted. But whatever your beef with her is, do not bring it onto the project. Your continued abusive editing is disruptive and may be seen as WP:VANDALISM. If you disagree you are free to take your concerns to the talk page. But do not attach any more maintenance tags without WP:CONSENSUS. This nonsense has gone on long enough. Ad Orientem (talk) 13:45, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Amanda Eliasch, you may be blocked from editing. Ad Orientem (talk) 13:48, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Amanda Eliasch. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 03:36, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning

This is your final and only warning. If you continue to target the Amanda Eliasch article with spurious tags your editing privileges will be suspended forthwith. Thank you for your attention. Philg88 ^♦talk 15:44, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

The discussion can be found here. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:02, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are now subject to a topic ban

Following a discussion on the administrators' noticeboard for incidents you are subject to a topic ban from everything related to Amanda Eliasch until you are told on this page that it has been lifted. For clarity a topic ban means that you aren't allowed to make any edits or comments regarding Amanda Eliasch on any page on Wikipedia, if you do you will likely be blocked probably for a long period of time or without an expiry date. If you have any questions you can ask on my talk page, if you wish to appeal you can do so at WP:ANI. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:52, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]