User talk:SimoninIceland
Welcome[edit]
|
Fescal AfD[edit]
Hi, why do you think the nomination of Fescal for deletion is vandalism, as you say here and here? The user explained his rationale at the Articles for deletion/Fescal discussion page. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:06, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Your recent edits[edit]
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
- Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
- With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (
or 
) 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 necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 19:16, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Removal of cleanup templates[edit]
Hi, I get that you're new, and perhaps enthusiastic to work toward preventing the deletion of Fescal, but removing legitimate cleanup templates is only going to draw negative attention to the article, because it's quickly going to look like you have an agenda, and when the community catches wind of this, it won't work out well for the article.
I have questions about the reliability of some of the sources, like this one. Who runs it? What is their editorial policy? What makes it a reliable source any more than the user reviews at Amazon.com? Or this source which also appears to be a blog. Why do we care what this particular blog has to say? Blah blah blah, these are all things that have been discussed ad nauseum, and that regular users would recognize as typical concerns. Please do not remove cleanup templates without fixing or improving the conditions they describe. And if you have a close relationship to the group, or to a company that might have been hired by the group, etc., please read WP:COI. It's somewhat peculiar when a brand new user leaps into a the fray on a 2 week old article, and starts deleting other people's edits and making accusations of vandalism. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:45, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
March 2014[edit]
Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with this edit to Fescal. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Katieh5584 (talk) 20:38, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
- Agreed. Your actions, Simon, including removing legitimate cleanup templates, are beginning to look like disruptive behavior. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:43, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
I merely was rejecting the flags placed on the article, it was not my intention to be disruptive nor will it ever be. I seek for this to be resolved in a spirit of friendliness and of refreshing candor.
Rejection of assertions placed on artist[edit]
It is with great enthusiasm that I seek to know why this artists should be deleted? References are credible and the profile is noteworthy. It seems that the decision to select this article for deletion was done with haste and without background reading on the subject. If one takes the time to read up on the subject in question, ABC National Radio has been cited as a reference, not once, but twice, and the subject in question has featured in a few magazines (physical and digital).
I feel that it would be better for the community (editors) to better establish that notability, rather than carrying out libel actions.
- This question should be posted at Talk:Fescal where more people are likely to see it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:14, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Please don't remove cleanup templates[edit]
Hi, please don't remove cleanup templates from Fescal until the issues are resolved. The community hasn't yet established whether or not the subject is notable, and so the notability tag should remain so that other editors can "help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic." It is not your place to unilaterally remove these templates even if you personally disagree with what the templates are saying. You might also benefit from reading WP:OWNERSHIP. This is not your article; it belongs to Wikipedia. You are being given some latitude because you are new, but continuing to assert your point of view on the article will likely wind up getting you blocked if you persist. I also notice that you haven't responded to the Articles for Deletion discussion. If you don't participate in the discussion, you'll have some culpability if the article is deleted. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:01, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
SimoninIceland, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]
|
Hi SimoninIceland! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
Signing your posts[edit]
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fescal, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
- Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
- With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) 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 necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. Ruby Murray 18:55, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you Ruby, much appreciated.