User talk:Blackguard SF/Archive 4

User 46.208.228.150

Happy New Year. I believe you are attempting to communicate with this user, who to be honest is problematic. This user has left an abusive message on my Talk Page regarding an edit I made on Creature of Havoc. Although previously blocked and spoken to regarding ownership issues, this user persists. I didn't even get a chance to post a rationale on the Talk Page before I was slammed. Can anything be done? Regards Asgardian (talk) 05:22, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

This user has been blocked for 72 hours. If he is unquestionably abusive after the block expires, you should report the user to administrators, though your situation looks more like an edit war and should be discussed on the article's talk page first. Blackguard 03:23, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the assist. Hopefully he'll be more polite next time and give the Talk page a chance. Asgardian (talk) 07:15, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Dear Sir, unfortunately this user is trying to evade their block. More editing on Creature of Havoc and the IP is the same source. Will report it. Regards Asgardian (talk) 23:13, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: List of Kenya Counties

Hello Blackguard SF. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of List of Kenya Counties, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Redirect seems plausible. Thank you. GedUK  13:01, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	I give you this for your continuous and diligent efforts in new page patrolling all this while. Keep up the good work! Ugog Nizdast (talk) 11:06, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Regarding edits to "Death of Brian Deneke"

My name is Mike Deneke--the father of Brian Deneke. The edits I made were corrections of incorrect biographical info that has been posted. Mden1997 (talk) 04:35, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

User:Mden1997 - Wikipedia typically goes by what reliable sources say, not firsthand reports, and the information in your edits are contradicted by the Amarillo Globe-News. However, your contributions don't seem controversial, so I've self-reverted as a show of good faith. Mr. Deneke, I hope you continue editing Wikipedia, but it's very important to use the edit summary field for every edit, and you should discuss your edits on the talk pages of articles, especially on subjects to which you're connected, instead of edit warring. Blackguard 06:31, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Raymond Chow Kwok-cheung#Requested move 6 February 2015

You were involved in the article. I invite you to a move discussion. --George Ho (talk) 20:00, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Please Don't Abuse Speedy Deletion

regular deletion is just fine, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KikeJewBoy (talk • contribs) 23:19, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely. Blackguard 01:56, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Misclick

Hey Blackguard SF. Just before deleting the attack page you tagged (which I'm not naming because I do not think attention should be drawn to defamatory content) I misclicked and rolled back your edit tagging it. Thought I'd drop a message if you got an Echo notification about that. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:52, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Regarding my edits to Sarcasm and 10 Dimensions

Sarcasm, I understand, was a bit out of line (although I tried to code it so it would be invisible), but 10 Dimensions was a stub and, frankly, was about to be deleted (look it up on the AfD). Thank you for your message, though, and I will be more careful. The Pokémon Fan (talk) 23:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if it's the Codex Leicester or a stub, Wikipedia is not a message board. It's good you're being more careful, because changing people's talk page comments and vandalizing articles usually guarantees a very short editing career. Blackguard 01:33, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

June 2015

Hi. Thank you for your help with the vital work of patrolling new pages. I noticed that you are not marking some of the pages you've reviewed as patrolled. Please do remember to click the 'mark this page as patrolled' link at the bottom of the new page if you have performed the standard patrolling tasks. Where appropriate, doing so saves time and work by informing fellow patrollers of your review of the page, so that they do not duplicate efforts. Thanks again for volunteering your time at the new pages patrol project. I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message. (talk to me) (contributions) @ 07:56, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi I dream of horses. This is deliberate. I mark a page as unreviewed when a newly created article needs another pair of eyes, usually for notability issues, but I'm not comfortable marking it for speedy deletion. Blackguard 16:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello Blackguard SF. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that you shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1), or content (CSD A3), moments after they are created, as you did at Ghaffar Aziz. It's best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. Adam9007 (talk) 00:33, 23 June 2015 (UTC)