User talk:Usb10/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 8

Sissy Boy

I don't understand you. How is advertising not allowed? Asda, lidl, nike, jjb sports, greggs the bakers, mcdonalds, etc.... all have pages. Why is this company not allowed one?--90.217.99.8 (talk) 17:10, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Did you even read the links I gave you? Read WP:NOT. This is not what Wikipedia is for. Usb10 ^Connected? 17:11, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

But it is used for that. Why is this company any different?--90.217.99.8 (talk) 17:13, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

No, it isn't. Those pages are about companies, but they aren't advertisements. The way you:

1. Turned a redirect for a completely different thing into your text

2. Wrote about an non-notable company; see WP:GNG

3. Made the tone of your text read like an advertisement

is enough to convince me to revert that edit. Please read WP:NPOV, WP:NOT, and WP:GNG. Usb10 ^Connected? 17:17, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

It was not a advertisement. I do not work for that company or have anything to do with it. I do not even know much about it. I made the article first in the hope someone who does would then edit it later and give some insight into the funny name. I wrote neutrally- I said it is a Dutch shop, not its a great shop. And its all over the place in the Netherlands, its very notable, lots of small companies have wikipedia pages. As for the redirect it should not have been a redirect in the first place. What else is there to do when a redirect fills what should be a page but change it?--90.217.99.8 (talk) 17:23, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Just because a redirect is something you think is silly doesn't mean you get to wreck it. Also, you provided no sources and it has no evidence of notability. See WP:V. Note: Because you are editing under an IP, you cannot create an article; this doesn't mean people will let you turn existing articles into your "own" page. Usb10 ^Connected? 17:27, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Its not wrecking. Its making something where there was nothing.

For notability just google it - http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=6aF&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&q=sissy+boy+netherlands&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= Lots of links discussing it. Its clearly a real, large chain. Facebook it has lots of fans: http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/pages/Sissy-Boy/232983464942 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.217.99.8 (talk) 17:34, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

"If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list." First, you cited no sources, which is not good, you must cite your text; two, that google search gave me no reliable sources, three, it is wrecking; you can't just take something and turn it into a completely different thing. Usb10 ^Connected? 17:39, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Usuario: Viavaelcelta

Sorry, I'm Spanish and that's why I was wrong to put "user" to put "usuario." --Vivaelcelta (talk) 01:55, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

That's okay, you can, if you want, replace the content of the page with {{db-g7}} and it will be deleted. However, with my deletion tag on it, it's bound to be deleted one way or the other. Usb10 ^Connected? 01:57, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: Revert

Hi :) Note that this was actually me testing out if a proxy was blocked or not. Just a note ;) --Addihockey10^e-mail 22:44, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Driving School

Hi! Thanks for sorting out the spam/unconstructive edit that 94.7.112.118 made to Driving School, normally these things get missed! Keep up the good work! TehGrauniad (talk) 16:32, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Why Did My External Link Not Fit The Guidelines?

Hello Usb10, I am contacting you to ask why you took down the external link I added to the Water damage wiki. The external link that I added complied 100% to the guidelines. "Some acceptable links include those that contain further research that is accurate and on-topic, information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy." As you can see here, the Water Damage Survival Guide link I added was "accurate and on-topic" as well as "information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content." Obviously I could not add the whole survival guide text on the page because a) it it copyrighted and b) the guide is 20 something pages long (much too long for a wiki). Please stop removing the link if you don't know the guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leadsbyfone (talk • contribs) 19:18, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Looking at the link, the website appears to read like an advertisement and the website includes puffery. We tend to worry about the quality of the website you link to a little more than if the link adds info to the article. Plus, two other editors had reverted that link you added before. Usb10 ^Connected? 23:01, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Per your request

I've deleted the subpage you requested. Apologies for the delay, but I just got home from work. See ya 'round Tiderolls 23:22, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Fasti (poem)

The subsection I deleted has no references. It also, in my opinion, qualifies as an unqualified piece of trivia. Though the article is already small, I don't think something like that is doing it any favors. Unless you have some specific case against it, please respect this reversion. The Alzabo

Opps, my bad. In the future, use a edit summary explaining what you did so that I'll know not to revert it. Usb10 ^Connected? 00:28, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing. The Alzabo —Preceding undated comment added 00:31, 25 December 2010 (UTC).

Trade Secrets entry

Hi Usb10.

I added the history and related content. I did so without having been signed in, and I saw that you had deleted it. I signed in, so you could see who I was. As you will see, I am a reasonable authority on the topic. (Here's my bio: http://www.beckreedriden.com/russell-beck/.) As you will see, I teach Trade Secrets and Restrictive Covenants at Boston University School of Law. I hope that quells any concerns you had about the source. (FYI, I have no connection to the authorities; they are not advertising, etc.; I merely cite to them for my class.)

If you don't think that the history belongs or have any other concerns, please let me know.

Thanks.

RB — Preceding unsigned comment added by Russellbesq (talk • contribs) 03:05, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

The reason why I reverted it is because 1. It was abruptly placed in the middle of a section 2. It appeared to be slightly biased 3. It was unsourced and it was original research. Read WP:V, WP:NPOV and WP:OR Usb10 ^Connected? 01:14, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

STiki Userbox

Hi there, Usb10. I'm the author of the WP:STiki anti-vandal tool, and I stumbled across this User:Usb10/Userboxes/STiki userbox floating in your space. If you don't object, I'd like to make your design publicly available to my users? Thanks, West.andrew.g (talk) 16:00, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Go right ahead. Usb10 ^{plug me in} 02:11, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Huggle2

Why don't you try Huggle2? WAYNESLAM 22:42, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

I would use Huggle2 but I couldn't get it to download for some reason. I will try to see if I can get it to download. Usb10 ^{plug me in} 01:48, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay. Good luck! WAYNESLAM 02:00, 10 January 2011 (UTC)