User talk:DeadlyAssassin/Archive 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Speak
Hi DeadlyAssassin, I believe that you have deleted my article on Speak Group, Int., and maybe the talk page as well. I am writing to see if you could email me a copy of the deleted article. I can show the people here in Paris that I tried to dispell the confusion between them (Speak Group, Int.) and SPEAK network. May I say to them that they are simply to small to matter? or perhaps you may have suggestions on how to help them distinguish themselves from SPEAK network. Thank you, Toroloco (talk) 18:20, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
- Hi there. I'm not an admin, so didn't delete the article, you should probably have a word with User:Accounting4Taste who was the deleting admin. The article was deleted not because there may be confusion between the group and a company, but because of notability concerns. There are some guidelines on what Wikipedia considers to be notable that you can read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). If you believe that you can rewrite your article to cover off those concerns you are encouraged to do so. Best of luck. --Deadly∀ssassin 18:26, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
User:Ari.staff
Please use UAA only to report people who need to be blocked for their username.
Identifying yourself and your affiliation isn't abusive promotion. It's actually what we want people to do when there's a potential conflict of interest, and certainly not something that merits an immediate block (which is what WP:UAA is for) just because Ari.staff chose to do so in his/her username. You can tell it's not promotional because nobody's going to see the name "Ari.staff" and say "hmm, I'd better give some money to the Advanced Retinal Institute".
Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, DeadlyAssassin! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Daniel (talk) 06:00, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
What is the big deal?
Why are you nutters so obsessed with dear Damien. He is fiction, he does not exist, he is not real and never has been. I just like to play around with the etymology of the name. --Andrew Sprott
- The problem is that this is an encyclopaedia, not a playground for you and your theories. If you can find some references for why what you are doing is relevant to the Omen movie then it is welcome to be posted. Please don't forget to sign your posts with ~~~~ --Deadly∀ssassin 02:37, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Well, mate, you play along with The Omen and remember *clearly* in your mind what it actually is.
Andrew Sprott —Preceding unsigned comment added by CarnMeynen (talk • contribs) 14:40, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Patrolling
I've recently started patrolling the new articles and I'm amazed at the amount of stupid articles (for example, "this person is sexy" contest and similar). One thing is still bothering me about the patrol---when we request speedy deletion, should we click "this page was patrolled"? I've noticed that some articles that are about to be deleted still don't have that "was patrolled" link clicked... Thanks for the answer in advance. Dmarex (talk) 09:16, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
- Hi there - good luck with the patroling, welcome to the team. I have to admit that I don't always click the patrolled link myself, because I forget. It's best if you click it so that other patrollers don't retread over the same ground, but there is no hard and fast rule that you have to click it. Hope that helps, and see you around. --Deadly∀ssassin 01:28, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Livonia
Hello, just passing by , wanted to check on what were your intentions with Livonia articles? you removed the hoax tag and suggested merging Livonia article into Kingdom of Livonia? Currently I'd need to revert your edits unless you have a good plan you'd like to share? Kingdom of Livonia in current state is a hoax and the issues are discussed at the talk page. Please let other people know what you have in mind and address any such questions at the talk pages first. Please also respond at the talk pages or in case you choose to revert your edits, feel free. Thanks!--Termer (talk) 05:24, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for contacting me. I have revered my edits. I hadn't noticed the discussion on the talk page, and I made my changes based on the results of a Google search, clearly I was mistaken. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. --Deadly∀ssassin 08:55, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Evan210's warning message
Normally I agree with you. However, Man Walks on the Moon falls into a category of blatant, obvious hoaxery. He's been warned that the page was an inappropriate addition; when Evan210 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) re-created it, I cautioned that repeating down that line of behaviour could get him blocked.
He's now re-added the page with a hangon tag. I'm curious to see how he justifies the page. —C.Fred (talk) 22:09, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
- My concern was that I had tagged the article for deletion and included the relevant welcome tag warning Evan210 of the issues. I didn't see the need to jump straight to a level 3 warning. --Deadly∀ssassin 07:53, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Why are you deleting my posts?
Hey,
How come you're deleting my posts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Familyguy78 (talk • contribs) 01:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- Hi there. I'm not an admin, so didn't delete the article, but just marked it because of my concerns. I marked the article because of notability concerns, there are some guidelines on what Wikipedia considers to be notable that you can read. I see that you have now improved the article to include references which is what needs to happen to ensure that Wikipedia remains a high quality resource. Best of luck. --Deadly∀ssassin 01:47, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Double-ewe, tee, eff?!
Why did you add your own signature to the {{Firstarticle}} template??? Please be much more careful when editing templates! - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 13:30, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- I was under the impression that the noinclude tags would include the signature of the person applying the template rather than my signature. --Deadly∀ssassin 21:33, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- You used the <includeonly> tag, which operates a little differently: it shows the text only when the template is included or substituted. <noinclude> shows the text only when directly viewing the template, not when it's included or substituted. Since there's no reason for you to have your personal signature in a global template, you simply need to add the four tildes (~~~~) at the end, and that will immediately pull the signature of the logged in user posting it. You specifically added code that drew in your own signature. In retrospect, it was probably hard for you to test that unless you had an alternate account and could see it was still drawing that specific signature. Please me a bit more careful; that's all. Cheers and happy editing! - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 13:05, 24 June 2008 (UTC)