User talk:John Halloran

April 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. One or more of the external links you added in this edit to the page Susan Boyle do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. You may wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. - ℅ ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 04:44, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Nabulion prefix:Talk:Napoleon I of France

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

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 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Clubmarx (talk) 01:19, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Astrology and computers

A tag has been placed on Astrology and computers 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 clear 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 verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. 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 - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. Verbal chat 19:03, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A problem with an automated tool seemed to leave the wrong notice above, which explains the "hangon" confusion. Apologies for that. Verbal chat 19:28, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

June 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Astrology and computers, 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. Verbal chat 19:27, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiquette

You might need to see this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#John_Halloran.C2.A0.28talk.C2.A0.C2.B7_contribs.29 Slatersteven (talk) 19:44, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:WQA

Please see a relevant report about your behaviour here. Verbal chat 19:46, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The "She" wasn't a problem (although it isn't polite where I'm from). The main issue was the rest of the post and your general attitude towards me. In case you missed it, I replied at WQA. Verbal chat 21:28, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding actual RS to the article. Could you please address the points raised at WQA and remove the "religious fanatic" comment and other personal attacks. Verbal chat 08:30, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please respond to the WP:WQA thread. Verbal chat 10:02, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your note, I appreciate the sentiment. I am sure we can get the article into a satisfactory state as soon as we manage to get over the friction created by Verbal's ego. I believe in WP:SPADE as a means to handling disputes. Of course Verbal was within his rights to point a finger at the unsatisfactory references of the article as it stood. But as soon as it became evident that he was trying to boss around an article on a topic he knows nothing about, it is perfectly fine to point out the fact. We should avoid attacking a user's person (that is, second-guess their real life character or circumstances from their online behaviour), but it is perfectly fair game to attack their online behavior, as in, calling a crappy argument crap, a clueless edit clueless, and a pathetic waste of time pathetic.

I hope you appreciate that in order to be considered encyclopedic, the article needs to be a fully referenced account of astrology software packages, without any added commentary. I am confident that it is easy enough to gather the necessary references. I would particularly welcome an overview of popular astrology applications on mobile devices today. --dab (𒁳) 10:47, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]