Jump to content

User talk:BranStark/archive2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Deletion review for Mark Hemmings

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Mark Hemmings. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Tomseddon (talk) 18:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Editor Review:

I reviewed you, JSYK. :) Cheers, Spawn Man Review Me! 03:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Your editor review (copycat header of the one above :P)

Hi, Ryan! I'm just here to bug you about your editor review; I was wondering if you'd consider archiving it. Of course, this is purely optional; there is no requirement at all. I'm just asking because the list is getting a bit crowded. Again, if you'd like to stay on longer to see if you get more reviews then by all means feel free to do so. Cheers, Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺) 04:27, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello RyanLupin, I have granted rollback rights to your account. The reason for this is that, after a review of some of your contributions, I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended use of reverting vandalism: I do not believe you will abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck. Acalamari 02:40, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Your userpage

I reverted vandalism from your user page. Dustitalk 18:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much! :) —— Ryan (t)•(c) 20:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey, no problem, thats what we are here for :) Dustitalk 17:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Response to your Question

Re your question about the link on my user page to Miamiboyzinhere's talk page, I was looking through a list of people listed for vandalism and he was the first one that popped up. Then I read through all the trouble he has been causing you (and others) and added the link.

I suspect it's him that left that recent stupid comment I reverted on your talk page.

I will remove it once they finally get rid of him. Or maybe I should remove it now if you think it will get me drawn into it all.Ozzieboy (talk) 13:05, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

No no I was just curious is all. Thanks very much for the reversion on my userpage, much appreciated! :) —— Ryan (t)•(c) 13:40, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

195.194.215.206

Vandalism alert

You have been paged because a user has reported a high level of vandalism and you are listed as a contact

This is an automatically generated message. If problems occur, please contact User:nathanww

RE: Thanks

No problem at all!

--The Helpful One (Review) 22:17, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

RE: Barnstar

Thank-you for your Barnstar! You rock! :-) Angel caboodle (talk) 11:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

THE UNIVERSAL STANDARD BOOK CODE (USBC)

This is obviously a test page and a copy of Universal Standard Book Code. I thought of redirecting it, but because it is all capitalised and starts with the word "theE I decided not to. Regards LittleOldMe (talk) 11:19, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, yes I see this now —— Ryan • t | c 11:20, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

You deleted a page!

The page 'Roblox' is missing, I was surprised that it didn't have it's own page. Anyway, I spend about 30 mins making it but it got deleted straight away, why? Apparently it was advertising, no way!

Couldn't you bring the article back? Why did you delete the page in the first place, it was hardly advertising, but it did have that speedy delete thing... :o

And I guess i could put in that little Keep or wateva' it was at the title but how can I, it's been deleted!  :(

Maybe the website said they didn't want an article on wikipedia or something so whenever somebody make an article about it, it gets deleted. and I right?  :/

To be honest the page was only like 2 paragraphs long but it would be better if there was at least something for roblox...

The page in question was deleted per A7 - "An article about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. This is distinct from questions of verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability; to avoid speedy deletion an article does not have to prove that its subject is notable, just give a reasonable indication of why it might be notable. A7 applies only to articles about web content or articles on people and organizations themselves, not articles on their books, albums, software and so on. Other article types are not eligible for deletion by this criterion." The page Roblox has also been protected to prevent it's recreation and can only be edited by an administrator. For more information, check out Why was my page deleted? to learn why Roblox was deleted. —— Ryan • t | c 13:14, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't Delete my page please

I'm doing an article on Wikipedia for a school project. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ansset (talk • contribs) 14:10, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

If your article doesn't meet the Wikipedia Polices and Guidelines or the Wikipedia Notibility Guidelines then it will be deleted. Wikipedia is not the place to showcase school projects —— Ryan • t | c 14:14, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

RE: Service ribbon

Thanks for the service ribbon! :-) Oh and PS: I just noticed... our signatures on Wikipedia are very much alike haha. - K e n g - t | c - 17:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

collegiate secret societies

Hi ryan, no tag need on sacred order of skull..., it is all part of an effort many many to fix the collegiate secret socities of north america page. The page has been nominated as a "good article"- were are all just turning noted and cited red links into blue to complete the page. thanksSocietyfinalclubs (talk) 23:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't see it nominated at WP:GAN but I have noticed that it was nominated for deletion and on 10 July 2007 and was given a unanimous delete —— Ryan • t | c 23:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

It's all a bit confusing but the User:Societyfinalclubs is referring to the article Collegiate secret societies in North America as that which has been nom for WP:GAN. The user seems to be attempting to make articles for all the societies which are referenced from said article from what I can see. Nk.sheridan   Talk 23:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I can see this now. Very confusing :P —— Ryan • t ¦ c 23:30, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey there, there is alot of info for sacred skull... so I will be spanding some time on it, to not have edit conflicts, just let me work on it throughout the evening, I will make sure all is clean before I am officially done- lots of info to add. thanksSocietyfinalclubs (talk) 23:40, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

That's fine, I have no intention of making any further edits, all I did was fixed the references, that way you'll have a base template to use for future references as I got the impression you didn't know how to do this. If the article undergoes a major revamp or edit, I recommended using the {{inuse}} or {{underconstruction}}. Good luck! —— Ryan • t | c 23:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou

We are looking for trouble be leaving that talk on the page- these topics have had a lot of problems in the past, administartors just had a mix up now- I have put hours into fixing tons of society pages and, I am not going to take the chance of people screeming hoax and having everything destroyed- this situation is an exception to the rule, and those that have been involved with fixing the Collegiate secret societies in North America know what I am talking about. I appreciate your concern for the rules- but it is best if we start out clean- we are looking for trouble by having some delete notice on that talk page, and then creating a whole cycle of confuson and mass panic- please allow me to remove it thank you, it is for the best in this situation, please be reasonable- thank you very much Societyfinalclubs (talk) 00:30, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

How can you justify your reversion? You fear controversy? If the article was nominated for deletion in the past and deleted due to an unanimous consensus then it was clearly a just removal. This kind of information is best left intact. I'm not going to let this turn into an edit war but I will insist in the reversion of your page blanking. But be warned, if you keep continue blanking the page, you will be classed as a vandal and will be banned. Breaching of the 3RR rule is serious and will often be considered grounds for an immediate ban from the site on the very first occurrence. I've tried to help you in the creation of this article, I've fixed your refs and offered you help but if you're going to come back and bite me then next time I won't bother. —— Ryan • t | c 00:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
These secret society pages have tons of hoax accusations and cause massive problems across wikipedia. It is best to start out clean. Tons of people have put tons of effort in fixing all of these society articles because of hoax accusations and all sorts of problems- we are asking for trouble if we do not start out clean- we have to use a bit a reason in this case- and know what is best, administrators had a mix up, it has all been cleared up, I got the OK, and lets start it off clean. thank youSocietyfinalclubs (talk) 00:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
If you can prove the article's notability then there is no need to worry about members claiming it as hoax —— Ryan • t | c 00:42, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
If there is no problem with notability regarding the articles on secret societies linked from the article Collegiate secret societies in North America then there is no reason to worry about WP:HOAX. However, most of these linked articles lack WP:NOTABILITY IMO. Nk.sheridan   Talk 01:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Barstar

The Guidance Barnstar
For your contributions and guidance to new or lost users, I hereby award User:RyanLupin this Barnstar! Your efforts on Wikipedia are highly valued and I encourage you to continue your service. - Keng - t | c - 17:00, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Your user page

I think you might want to remove some more vandalism (edit 2008-05-15) from your userpage --Flatfish89 (talk) 23:06, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, if you hadn't have alerted me, that probably would've stayed there for a while. Thanks again —— Ryan • t | c 23:13, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


Vandalism alert

You have been paged because a user has reported level 2 vandalism and you are listed as a contact.

This is an automatically generated message. If problems occur, please contact User:nathanww. Alexius08 is welcome to talk about his contributions. 02:49, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

thanks for the shiny!

Like the title says... :) J.delanoygabsadds 16:59, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem, keep up the good work! ——Ryan | t • c 17:02, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Ta for reverting the vandalism from my talk page Tresiden (talk) 17:00, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome ——Ryan | t • c 17:02, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
And again :) Tresiden (talk) 10:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Haha no problem at all :) ——Ryan | t • c 10:50, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Huggle Response

Hi there. Just to let you know I responded to your query at Wikipedia:Huggle/Feedback. ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 19:14, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Cannon

See my comment on the article talk page. I wasn't the one adding "penis", as I'm sure a review of the logs will confirm. :) 87.194.245.158 (talk) 19:25, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Please accept my apologies for inappropriately warning you. I've reverted my warning. Sorry again. ——Ryan | t • c 19:43, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Ah, no problem. I know I've been - less-than-serious - with some of my edits in the past, so I don't mind being reminded what the function of Wikipedia is. :) 87.194.245.158 (talk) 19:53, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

FORESKIN RESTORATION EDIT

The recent edit you made to Foreskin restoration constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thanks. ——Ryan | t • c 21:34, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

T-TAPES.NET == OUCH! ==

May 9, 2008. Dear Ryan,

We are a small company in California serving the needs of the Restoration Comminity since 2003. While we may not be html saavy, our mission is to make foreskin restoration afforable and accessible to men around the world.

We have registered with Wikipedia and are unclear why our attempting to place a link is considered vandalism. We see similar services with links. Would you be good enough to contact us with clarification as to what we need to do to be listed on your pages as a restoration resource, and HOW?

Thank you for your time and kind assistance.

Regards, PORTER WORTH T-TAPES.NET

Please read WP:EL, more specifically WP:ELNO which will give you an insight into wikipedia's external link policy. (Quote): "Links to be avoided: 4. Links mainly intended to promote a website. See External link spamming" and "Links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services, or to sites with objectionable amounts of advertising." You will see that the edit you made to Foreskin restoration is in violation of the said policy. If you have any further questions, don't hesitate to contact me but please ensure you sign your comment with the four tidles (~~~~). ——Ryan | t • c 22:02, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

"This time of night"

Just to tell you, it's not night for some people. Just an FYI, future reference Vinson (talk) 22:32, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I suppose you're right, I've made the change. Thanks for the heads up ——Ryan | t • c 23:04, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

That was a little bizzare, but managed well. Thanks for the revert of the attack! --Jza84 |  Talk  00:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem, that guy was a real pain! :) ——Ryan | t • c 01:00, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I've tagged his images for speedy deletion.... Vinnie Jones over Lord Nelson!?... what's wrong with these people?! Thanks again though! --Jza84 |  Talk  01:03, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Kid

you still look like a little kid. mwah 81.157.65.181 (talk) 01:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Mistake in labelling page blanking as vandalism

Please remove your vandalism warning from User talk:Lordinajamjar. As the author of an article which had been criticized for lack of sources, he is entitled to blank it and under WP:CSD that constitutes a speedy deletion request. As a result, I speedily deleted it. Thanks. Edison (talk) 16:46, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much for removing the vandal warning and in general for your efforts against vandalism. Keep up the good work! Edison (talk) 16:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, and I apologise for the inappropriate warning, I'm still trying to get to grips with the power of Huggle. Thanks again ——Ryan | t • c 16:54, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


On Victoria Eleanor

Hi. A few hours ago you deleted a comment left on my talk page:

==HEY!== - How are you? It's victoria here...it has been very long :)

I think there was no apparent reason for you to delete it. I've checked the IP's historial and found no vandalism. The same user however left a message commenting on the comment deletion on my user talk page on the Nahuatl Wikipedia. I don't know if this is real but as far as I knew, User:Victoria Eleanor was User:Jade1984 as well but her last contribution dates on August 7, 2007. If there is any actual reason for you to have the comment deleted (as I don't consider it vandalism), please let me know. --Fluence (talk) 22:22, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes I reverted that comment because Wikipedia is not a social network such as MySpace or Facebook. "The focus of user pages should not be social networking, but rather providing a foundation for effective collaboration." The comment in question: "- How are you? It's victoria here...it has been very long :)"...is both unconstructive and inappropriate for an encyclopaedia. I noticed the user made a similar comment here which was also reverted. If you have any more questions, don't hesitate to drop me a line. ——Ryan | t • c 22:36, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


Barnstar

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Phenomenal work with vandalism man! You have beaten me to, it must be at least 10, reverts just today. Keep it up! - Icewedge (talk) 23:03, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks very much! Really appreciate it :) ——Ryan | t • c 23:06, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
You deserve it, I had to give you this barnstar just so I could get some reverts in myself :P - Icewedge (talk) 23:08, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Reversion

No problems, I saw you were getting frustrated at AIV! DuncanHill (talk) 23:42, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I was getting very frustrated because I witnessed many other vandalism reports being resolved and users banned just not the guy causing me grief!. Thanks again ——Ryan | t • c 23:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

RfA

Cheers bud. I think I'll probably leave it until after the summer to reapply, but it's good to know that I'll have your support (provided I keep my nose clean ;) ) – PeeJay 08:46, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Blog Early Blog Often

Yo Ryan,

Just an FYI, but Bebo is not an acronym. Michael Birch chose it simply because it was a short domain name that was easy to remember. Bebo is not primarily a blogging site - like xanga or blogger would be.

~jose


Look me up, I'm on the about page. ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.177.138 (talk) 23:31, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

No, Bebo is a backronym for "blog early blog often," it was mentioned in the Guardian newspaper ——Ryan | t • c 23:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey Ryan

hey, I just tried to write something in "Leibniz." I don't know how, but please flag it as Neutrality of this article is disputed. Whoever wrote a large portion of it, particularly regarding Voltaire, clearly believes Leibniz is right. That's fine, except that it's an opinion, and should be proclaimed as such- not the truth. He calls critics of Leibniz "lay people." Pretty ridiculous, ay? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.95.98.147 (talk) 21:52, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I've tagged the article as you've requested, however, in future rather than just blanking the page (which as far as wikipedia polices go, is far worse than COI), try enhancing the article yourself or simply tag it using one of the many templates available in the tamplate library. If you have any further queries, don't hesitate leaving me a message. ——Ryan | t • c 22:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

i appologise, i appreciate all the good work you do —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.140.113.236 (talk • contribs) 22:34, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Category Amorite

Somebody was changing the noun 'Amorites' to the adjective 'Amorite', and I was restoring the proper name for the category, with a message on his/her talk page. Categorystuff (talk) 23:21, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I can see what you were doing now. My bad, I've reverted my reversion and rollbacked the note on your talk page. My apologies. ——Ryan | t • c 23:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Categorystuff (talk) 23:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Norman Schwarzkopf, Sr.

What appears to be the problem with my recent edit to this page? 202.63.58.240 (talk) 11:59, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

It was an accidental reversion, you can see in the page history that as soon as I reverted your edit, I rollbacked my error ——Ryan | t • c 12:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

May 2008

Mistaken warning removed - I'm really sorry about that. Pseudomonas(talk) 13:48, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem, when using Huggle or Twinkle, it's so easily done. Thanks ——Ryan | t • c 13:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Please Help

Dear Ryan,

Hi! This is regarding the edit that I had made on the Tata Group page. I work in the Corporate Communications department, Tata Capital, Mumbai. The problem is this: I had uploaded the corporate profile of Tata Capital (twice: once with the username Tatacapital and the second time with the username Sayonara1312). Due to some reason, the page was rerouted to the Tata Group profile ((twice: the first time the username was not acceptable the second time the editing was reported as Vandalism by you). Now whenever someone types "Tata Capital" in Search, they view a page which mentions information on Tata Group and not on Tata Capital.

I would like to know how can I ensure that the above does not happen and on typing Tata Capital - people view the profile that I upload. I had also mentioned the Tata Group's official website - where the Tata Capital profile is uploaded. I am not very tech-savvy, so it is very possibel that I might have missed some vital process - so please guide me on the same.

I hope I hear from you soon,

Thank you and regards,

Mudita K Chaturvedi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sayonara1312 (talk • contribs) 13:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Looking back through the history, I can see what you're trying to do, however, when you're editing the article Tata Group, you're removing so much of the original article without providing any reliable sources to prove the notability of your editions. In fact, your edits were so excessive and so much of the original article was removed that a Bot reverted your changes. If you wish to make such editions, you must provide a source to support what you're writing. On top of that, because you said you work at the company, you need to make sure you avoid conflict of interests. If you have any more problems, drop me a line on my talk page (here) ——Ryan | t • c 14:01, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I did give a support - i.e, the corporate website url. is there anything else that can be done? Rgds, Mudita—Preceding unsigned comment added by Sayonara1312 (talk • contribs) 13:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
The sources you provide must be from a reliable third party. If you do write or edit an article on an area in which you are personally involved, be sure to write in a neutral tone and cite reliable, third-party published sources, and beware of unintentional bias. Neutral point of view is one of Wikipedia's five pillars. If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it. ——Ryan | t • c 14:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Ejido

The information I added to the Ejido article is completely correct. It has become a very popular phrase to replace the lengthy "I put gum on". I would like to see it changed back. It was a simple addition to the article, and wrongly flagged as vandalism. Ejjjido. (talk) 14:27, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

You have a source for this claim? Clearly not...therefore as far as I'm concerned, it's unconstructive and pure vandalism. Also note that Wikipedia is not a usage guide or slang and idiom guide. ——Ryan | t • c 14:33, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
"unconstructive and pure vandalism" it is not. Being sourceless doesn't constitute uselessness. And as for unconstructive, it could be seen as an explanation of a phrase, which is not unconstructive in my opinion. Or do you enjoy obliviousness? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ejjjido. (talk • contribs) 14:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
In your edit you add a statement proclaiming the use of a 'slang word' amongst your school friends, you provide no source nor evidence to back up this statement, you're in clear violation of WP:NOTDICDEF yet you still claim this edition is constructive? Looking through your edit history, you're clearly out to spark trouble, near to none of your edits are positive contributions, most are sinister attempts to cause trouble. How do you expect me to take you seriously when you make edits such as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8? Eight out of twelve of your edits today (excluding your changes to my talk page and the Ejido article) constitute vandalism. ——Ryan | t • c 15:58, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Peak hour lol

Seems like friday night peak hour haha (vandals) Prom3th3an (talk) 14:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Tell me about it! ——Ryan | t • c 15:58, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikicookie

I am awarding you this WikiCookie for your constructive edits on Wikipedia--LAAFan 16:34, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey

Hey man,

I'm not trying to vandalize your site or nothing. I just don't want a bunch of ramblings about me on your site. Why is it vandalism to remove something that has no value? I google my name and all this crazy stuff comes up from your site. It's annoying. Codyinio (talk) 19:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

The only person who has the right to blank a user talk page is the user to which the page belongs to (per WP:USER). It is generally accepted, though controversial, that if personal attacks are taking place on a talk page, then the content can be edited by the person attacked. However, I can't really see any personal attack taking place in the page you blanked. This is something you should take up with the administrators noticeboard and/or dispute resolution. ——Ryan | t • c 19:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

GA reviewing

First of all, thanks for helping out! I just wanted to say that considering the size of the Chocolate article, it was a bit surprising that you couldn't find any issues at all... was the article really that good? dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 11:20, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I spent a while reviewing it and the only error that I could find was a spelling error which I corrected myself. I wasn't going to let that fail the article. If you want it to be reassessed, I won't step in your way. ——Ryan | t • c 11:31, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
THANK YOU SO MUCH!!! I never thought it would pass. Anyway, at the article's talk page, there's nothing in the article's history that talks about the GA pass. What happened? Limetolime talk to me • look what I did! 17:30, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Are you talking about when it was last promoted to a good article? Because I searched for similar evidence but couldn't find anything. Maybe it was inadvertently blanked. ——Ryan | t • c 17:33, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
No, right now. Is GimmeBot supposed to register the nomination in the article's milestones? Limetolime talk to me • look what I did! 17:36, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
No, the talk page is adjusted accordingly to show it's currently a good article. I don't know what you're asking ——Ryan | t • c 17:49, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Canterbury GA attempt

I'm informing you, as the editor who nominated the article, that Canterbury is currently on hold for seven days. I've left comments on the talk page regarding what I think needs to be done. In short, a lot I'm afraid. It might be worth asking WP:KENT to take a look and see if they can help improve it because I frankly believe there's too much for one person to do in a week unless they have a lot of sources to hand and know exactly what they're looking for. Good luck and happy editing. Nev1 (talk) 17:42, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

MEANIE!

NOBODY DELETES MY PAGE! No but seriously, that was mean. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jetblue1717 (talk • contribs) 01:56, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

First off, I didn't delete your article, I just nominated it for deletion which would have given you plenty of time to enhance it and/or place the {{hangon}} tag under the speedy to alert the administrator that you intend on extending your work. Secondly, even if you had used the above tag, the page was tagged under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics. If you have any more problems, leave me a message put please assume good faith. ——Ryan | t • c 09:51, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, RyanLupin! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. PS2pcGAMER (talk) 10:18, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Your user page design

I'm guessing you stole your user page design from me, am I right? It seems to have the same links, formatting, etc. --RyRy5 (talk) 04:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but didn't you take the design from someone else so effectively, I didn't steal it from you. Also, didn't you list it in the design center for people to see. Isn't that the reason it's there? I'm very happy to change it, though I've seen this design on quite a few uesrpages, didn't think it was a problem. ——Ryan | t • c 06:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I wasn't mad or anything. I was just curious who you got it from because there are quite a few user's who use User:Excirial's design. Yes, that is what WP:UPDC is for. I was just curios about all this is all. -- RyRy5 (talk) 06:37, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I could add your username next to User:Excirial's credit if you like? ——Ryan | t • c 14:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
I suppose. Sure, why not. Just don't say that I created it because, well, I didn't. Just add whatever you think would be necessary. If you need any help with your user page design, then just ask. :) I'm experienced in designing user pages if you looked at my list of them. --RyRy5 (talk) 23:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Ok I added a note at the bottom, is that OK or should I add more? ——Ryan | t • c 00:02, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
No, that looks good. --RyRy5 (talk) 00:26, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Username you created

Hi there,


I appreciate your work at WP:ACC, but you just created a username which I don't think is suitable:

User:Sallysinlovewithbenspinksnake - translates to Sally's in love with ben's pink snake. That username is not appropriate as per policy and I don't think you should have created it.

Thanks,

The Helpful One (Review) 16:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh my, what a mess...I've reported them to WP:UAA, thanks for the heads up ——Ryan | t • c 16:57, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
No problem! The Helpful One (Review) 17:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:BranStark/archive2&oldid=1075862785"