User talk:Terrillja/Archives/06/2010

Edit warring to keep material out of iPad

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} Regarding your edit warring to keep WP:RS material out of this article. This is a warning. Please desist from this, and cease harassing me on my talk page. Mish (talk) 06:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

As long as you keep editing against consensus and ignoring guidelines, I will keep removing it and enforcing WP:V and WP:SYNTH. And if you choose to keep making personal attacks against me or any other editors, you will find yourself blocked. It's not harassing you when you are being warned to stop making uncivil remarks.--Terrillja _talk 07:07, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Questionable deletion at Peter James Bethune

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} I don't understand this reason for this deletion: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_James_Bethune&diff=365556163&oldid=365554949 Does this mean that any information added to an article must directly mention the subject of the article? For example, if an article is about a particular model of a car, and it has a certain type of suspension, I can't add a line that this type of suspension is considered potentially dangerous unless the source mentions that particular model of car????? Ghostofnemo (talk) 02:33, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

There was no relation to the article. what amnesty thinks is not related to Bethune. Attempting to connect Bethune's detainment with Amnesty's statement is synthesis. --Terrillja _talk 02:46, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

There were two deleted references (news media sources). In one, Watson said Bethune was denied a lawyer. In the other, the ACLU said it was concerned with suspects in Japan being coerced into making confessions while denied access to a lawyer. Ghostofnemo (talk) 05:48, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Already answered on the talkpage. Quit forum shopping.--Terrillja _talk 05:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Forum shopping? Where did that come from? Where's the good faith? Ghostofnemo (talk) 13:37, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Another deletion that seems unsupported: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_James_Bethune&diff=365974855&oldid=365974691 Please revert your deletion. Ghostofnemo (talk) 13:41, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Undelete my 4 articles

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} Thay are also riligous schalers in pakistan and i'm a writer i want write the article about The sons of Syed Safdar Hussain Najafi and i'm not his son. pleas undelete the my 5 articles. Syedalinaqinaqvi (talk) 14:00, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

 Note:Already answered by deleting admin.--Terrillja _talk 17:00, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Images without sources

Please do not remove source information from images, even public domain images. All image description pages must have a source. Thanks! Powers ^T 18:59, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

If it's a corporate logo, the source is pretty much a moot point. Source is important for pictures to identify where they came from, but a corporate logo is generally assumed to be from the corporation's website and as such is generally irrelevant.--Terrillja _talk 06:24, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Malicious Behavior from Administrator

Administrators have a duty help edit and improve material, not delete it in its entirety. Your behavior has crossed the line. You have failed in your duties to remain neutral and helpful to the community. If my articles were believed to be in violation, you should have helped edit the text to match a neutral point of view, not delete the entire article and write malicious and antagonistic comments like "should probably just delete the whole thing."

I will try my best to have your administrative privileges revoked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjschmidt715 (talk • contribs) 14:06, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

One, I'm not an administrator, two, I did help you by removing promotional and spammy material. I could have just tagged the articles as spam and had them deleted, but I tried to help you by removing the spam and keeping neutral information.--Terrillja _talk 16:53, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

FYI, [1] and [2]. The user removed the warning from his/her talk page, but hopefully the message gets across. If any other problems arise, please let me or another admin know and we'll be happy to help. --B (talk) 17:40, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I sort of figured something like this would happen sooner or later with them, if they try to do the same again I'll let you know or take it to ANI.--Terrillja _talk 20:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Talk Back

Hello, Terrillja. You have new messages at Talk:2010 Showtime Southern 500.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Nascar1996 14:25, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion of Inspirada

I noticed that you added a Proposed Deletion tag to the article Inspirada. The page creator and only other editor removed that tag approximately 15 minutes later; they have since modified the article, but it still appears to be delete-worthy. There is nothing on the talk page, or any particular justification that the editor will be able to add RS to establish notability. However, the style of the writing is very personal (see, in particular, the note about the Casino). This appears to be a new-ish editor (about 1 month). I don't know what the appropriate step to take is; I just happened upon the article while looking at Recent Changes. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:05, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Turns out that it is notable....for defaulting on $500 million in loans (so far). I'll take a look at it in a few days though.--Terrillja _talk 07:20, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

June 2010

Sorry! but I haven't added content, as you did to the article Time Warner, I've just changed the content from Vivendi to Disney, so The Walt Disney Company is the largest media and entertainment conglomerate in the world. You changed the content and not cited a reliable source for the content of your edit. Take a look at Media conglomerate Thank you. User:Febo Apolo(talk) 13:30, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Actually, you changed the order without changing the ranking. It can't be third behind one company, so either it's third, as the article had stated, or it's second, which your edit did not change and yo did not provide a source for. The onus is on you to provide a source to reconcile what appears to be a contradictory statement. My only change was to revert back to the existing form of the article, you were the one that made a change.--Terrillja _talk 16:49, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Take a look at the existing form of the article [[3]]. Time Warner was the world's largest media conglomerate, but now it became the world's largest second 'coz the Disney Company. Take a look at [[4]]. Thank you so much User:Febo Apolo(talk) 14:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

As I said above, you never provided a source for your edit. Please provide a reliable source for any information that you change. Providing one after the fact is not adequate.--Terrillja _talk 00:45, 30 June 2010 (UTC)