User talk:Bugapi

Welcome

Welcome

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions seem to be advertising or for promotional purposes. Wikipedia does not allow advertising. For more information on this, see:

If you still have questions, there is a new contributor's help page, or you can write {{helpme}} below this message along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page and how to develop articles
Help pages
Tutorial
Article wizard for creating new articles
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! RadioFan (talk) 11:09, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of G-WAN (Web server) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article G-WAN (Web server) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/G-WAN (Web server) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. RadioFan (talk) 13:11, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A Cherokee webserver Troll has been identified as (at least one of) the "fellow editor" working behind the scene to eradicate G-WAN, after an independent comparative benchmark largely turned in G-WAN's favor. PLEASE HELP TO MAKE THIS (CHEROKEE WEBSERVER TROLL) EDITORIAL WAR AGAINST G-WAN CEASE.

Talkback

Hello, Bugapi. You have new messages at RadioFan's talk page.
Message added 13:14, 16 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

March 2011

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Thank you. RadioFan (talk) 14:10, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Good faith" when your sole arguments are about "permanent exclusion threats" instead of discussing the contents of the article? Cease the bad practice and I will praise your behavior.Bugapi (talk) 14:31, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Calm down

I've been monitoring recent changes, and saw your edits on User talk:RadioFan and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/G-WAN (Web server). There's personal attacks and a lot of anger. Please try and calm down: if you think RadioFan is abusing his authority (can't see any evidence of it myself) ask another administrator to take a look.

Shouting, making foolish appeals to the dictionary and treating other editors like they are dishonest fools is an ineffective way to win an argument. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:31, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe that asking one to justify an article deletion is qualified as "shouting or making foolish appeals". If the dictionary is not considered as a "reliable source" by you, then please tell me what other authority has your approval. I maintain that deleting an article without any justifiable reason is unfair.Bugapi (talk) 14:42, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The dictionary doesn't have authority in arguments for deletion. The articles for deletion process requires arguments consistent with Wikipedia policy. The nominator has provided a prima facie case for deletion: if you want to keep the article, screaming and gnashing your teeth, making foolish arguments like arguing about what the dictionary says rather than what WP:N and WP:GNG say about notability, doing a silly WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS routine, and attacking people who disagree with you is a bad strategy. We have seen it all before. If you want to have an article kept, provide reliable sources and a compelling argument, don't just shout and scream and attack people. I'm on the inclusionist end of the spectrum and I often try and find sources to save articles up for deletion: that's how it works round here. But why should I or anyone else bother? Why should anyone come to the defence of the article you've put up for deletion when you act in such a childish manner? —Tom Morris (talk) 08:43, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on User talk:Kuru. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. You are new here so Wikipedia editors are trying to treat you with patience and good humor but it's wearing thin. Multiple editors have tried to guide you to the guidelines and policies that we all abide by but you insist on attacking others here on your talk page, on their talk pages and in the deletion discussion on the G-WAN article. Please take a deep breath, read some of the links that experienced editors have provided and consider how you can follow this guidance. You'll get much further this way. RadioFan (talk) 17:03, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RadioFan, "good faith"is not about rewriting history (changing MY posts, or the titles of MY changes), nor it is about making changes about an article under the cover of a benign title while it targets a sepecific article (and guess what, this is always the same, see what game "Kuru" is playing on the history of "Comaprison of Web servers software"). This behavior is clearly rotten, and your calls to ignore that just add offense to injury.Bugapi (talk) 05:44, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Check-User action involving you

Hello. This is a courtesy note to inform you that a request for check user has been opened that concerns you. The thread may be found here[1] and you are free to comment, per the instructions given, if you wish. Have a nice day! Strikerforce (talk) 10:03, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. RadioFan (talk) 14:42, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RFC/U discussion concerning you (Bugapi)

Hello, Bugapi. Please be aware that a user conduct request for comment has been filed concerning your conduct on Wikipedia. The RFC entry is located at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Bugapi, where you may want to participate. RadioFan (talk) 18:32, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest

Hello Bugapi. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article G-WAN (Web server), you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Please review the statement that I have provided[2] on the article's talk page. Strikerforce (talk) 09:54, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note regarding ownership of articles

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. However, please know that editors do not own articles and should respect the work of their fellow contributors on G-WAN (Web server). If you create or edit an article, know that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Per this edit Strikerforce (talk) 12:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism warning

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at G-WAN (Web server). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. —Tom Morris (talk) 12:40, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism warning

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bugapi, you may be blocked from editing. —Tom Morris (talk) 12:43, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning

This is your last warning; the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at G-WAN (Web server), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. —Tom Morris (talk) 12:44, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Morris: you are preventing me from reverting vandalism from a Cherokee TROLL on the article that I WROTE.

3RR warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on G-WAN (Web server). 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. This is, in fact, a courtesy warning AFTER the fact, as you have already violated 3RR. Please stop your disruptive editing. Strikerforce (talk) 12:46, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 12:56, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.