User talk:Meachly
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Welcome
|
[edit] Speedy deletion tags
Hi there. Could you be a little more careful when applying speedy deletion tags? The A7 criteria can only be used when an article doesn't assert notability. For example Brad Heald. The notability is asserted as it says he is the bassist of an Australian band. If you would like any help understanding anything, please let me know. Seraphim♥ Whipp 13:38, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] CfD nomination of Category:Human stupidity
Category:Human stupidity, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. – Good Ol’factory (talk) 06:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to First Lady appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. --Catgut (talk) 21:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- Really? How exactly do you deduce that this is a "Non neutral point of view"? Meachly (talk)
-
- Your edit speaks for itself. Whatever you personally consider "would be thoroughly amusing" is your opinion which you are entitled to in your private life, but inserting your estimation into an encyclopedic article is not helpful and not in accordance with aforementioned policies. Please read Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, which should resolve any remaining questions regarding this issue, and is generally quite useful for new editors like yourself. --Catgut (talk) 03:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Speedy deletion tags
Please, be careful when adding speedy deletion tags on articles. The {{db-empty}} applies only on articles that have no content at all. See CSD A3. Thank you, Victao lopes (talk) 02:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- {{db-empty}} is CSD A1: "Very short articles without context" like that one. Meachly (talk) 02:43, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- Oh no, the article you tagged had context, in fact. It was patent nonsense, but it had context. See CSD A1 and CSD G1. Victao lopes (talk) 21:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Your edits to Abigail Taylor
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Abigail Taylor. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Meachly (talk) 06:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- I very strongly suggest that you leave me alone. I very strongly suggest that. I promise you. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 06:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC))
[edit] Valerie Lakey
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Valerie Lakey, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Valerie Lakey. Marasmusine (talk) 09:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Good work
Even though we had some semantic disagreements about the exact wording of a couple sentences, I wanted to say that your work on the Abigail Taylor article was excellent! I read through the history log to review the changes, and after several of your edits I found myself thinking "I wish I had thought of that". Despite some of the 'sound and fury' on the talkpage, the article itself looks great now. Well done : ) Doc Tropics 18:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Well thanks. I understand this case received high profile media coverage in the US. So it's understandable that people get emotional about it. Hopefully I've been able to see it more objectively, not living in the USA. Meachly (talk) 23:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
