Ryan Vesey (talk | contribs) Notification: speedy deletion nomination of Conservative parties in Norway. (TW) |
Screwball23 (talk | contribs) →thanks: new section |
||
Line 137: | Line 137: | ||
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the '''[[Talk:Conservative parties in Norway|the page's talk page directly]]''' to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for ''speedy'' deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact [[:Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles|one of these administrators]] to request that the administrator [[Wikipedia:Userfication#Userfication_of_deleted_content|userfy]] the page or email a copy to you. <!-- Template:Db-test-notice --><!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> <tt> </tt>[[User:Ryan Vesey|'''''Ryan''''']] [[User talk:Ryan Vesey|'''''Vesey''''']] [[Special:Contributions/Ryan Vesey|<small>Review me!</small>]] 21:26, 2 October 2011 (UTC) |
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the '''[[Talk:Conservative parties in Norway|the page's talk page directly]]''' to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for ''speedy'' deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact [[:Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles|one of these administrators]] to request that the administrator [[Wikipedia:Userfication#Userfication_of_deleted_content|userfy]] the page or email a copy to you. <!-- Template:Db-test-notice --><!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> <tt> </tt>[[User:Ryan Vesey|'''''Ryan''''']] [[User talk:Ryan Vesey|'''''Vesey''''']] [[Special:Contributions/Ryan Vesey|<small>Review me!</small>]] 21:26, 2 October 2011 (UTC) |
||
== thanks == |
|||
I read your post on my talk page. Thank you. It's rare for me to get positive feedback from people, and it is always appreciated to have a person who will be on my side. |
|||
In regards to the Linda McMahon article, I honestly do not think it is possible for anyone to bring it to GA status. The research on her has been pretty good, and after all the work I put into her page and her 2010 Senate campaign, I'm confident the subject has been covered in detail. The page itself has been solid and free from any type of errors/issues for months too. But don't be misled: the issue with the page has always been appeasing users like Collect. Collect, who has contributed nothing to that page except edit wars, is the type of editor who hates me so bad that he argued about her being called a business magnate, agreed to it, lost the argument, gave up, and months later, decided to bring it up again. He regressed the article from covering the Ring Boy Affair and would easily wipe out anything that could possibly be interpreted as negative to her. He's a moron, and he knows it too. The problem is, everytime I prove him wrong, he gets mentally fried, changes the story, and tries to team up with other editors or tries to find some administrative policy that he can weasel into holding his POV. He won't admit to being wrong, and has even written a long-winded essay on why editors shouldn't edit one article in depth because it can indicate undue editing or something like that... Long story short, he won't let it reach GA-status. I personally am a man of principle, and I would rather have an accurate page that readers can learn from, than try to appease the abusive editors of wikipedia to raise it one notch over to GA-status. I promise that anyone who wants to reach success will have to handle his poison, and believe me, even he knows he's a waste of time to talk to. |
|||
I know, I'm a bit much for most people to handle. I want to thank you for extending your help, and I will definitely let you know if I am in an editing dispute that may need a third person's point of view. I enjoy politics a lot, so you can expect to see me a lot on wikipedia. I am currently involved a lot on the [[Republican Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2012]]. I think this page could reach GA-status next year, but even if it never does, I am not so concerned.--[[User:Screwball23|<font color="0000EE">Sc</font><font color="4169E1">r</font><font color="00B2EE">ew</font><font color="FF6600">ba</font><font color="FFFF00">ll</font><font color="9400D3">23</font>]] [[User talk:Screwball23|talk]] 04:54, 3 October 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 04:54, 3 October 2011
|
||||||||
List of ex-gay people
Sorry about the "loss" of FVK, I didn't really interact with him but it's too bad.
If your list of ex-gay people is going to be deleted and you want to incubate it, I would suggest copying the code to a document and saving it on your computer. NYyankees51 (talk) 17:12, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Re: Welcome
Firstly, sorry for my delay in responding. I really appreciate your welcome message, and I certainly plan on hanging around more. :) Thank you also for your invitation to join the WikiProject - I don't believe as yet I'm committed enough to writing about conservatism, but who knows what may happen in the future. Thank you once again. Redverton (talk) 22:48, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello. You have a new message at MPSchneiderLC's talk page.
FVK
Hi Lionel, things change quickly it seems. Do you keep in touch with FVK via email or some other means. If so, let me know via my email, if possible. I have enjoyed getting acquainted with him and with you. I looked over the SAU article and have noticed its protection status. I am interested in helping. It seems that the LRB article is not highly contested at the moment. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 20:10, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Template:Bernard Nathanson films has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:44, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
- Why would you do that? That little template didn't do anything to you. That little template wouldn't hurt a fly. It was just minding it's own business trying to help people navigate this big scary wiki.– Lionel (talk) 03:25, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
- It was not needed. Binksternet (talk) 03:29, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
- You knew I was being sarcastic, right???? – Lionel (talk) 03:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
On another note, Binkster, I didn't mean to get touchy at the TfD. It's just, I thought you and I were, you know, embarking on a new chapter in our wiki-relationship. And to see you back with Ros, well, I may have overreacted. Do you forgive me? – Lionel (talk) 03:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
- You knew I was being sarcastic, right???? – Lionel (talk) 03:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
- It was not needed. Binksternet (talk) 03:29, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
CP Eagle, tangential
If you like the icon, please note that I am close to releasing a font that uses it as the glyph for the "bird" character (new in Unicode 6.0). It has recognizable Americana (liberty bell, Declaration, Stat of Lib, etc) for other dingbats, too. ⇔ ChristTrekker 14:18, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg/40px-Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg.png)
Message added 17:03, 14 September 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Template:Bernard Nathanson has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:20, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Thread at ANI
Please look back at WP:ANI#Multiple RfCs. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:29, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
- Yes Tryptofish started a new subsection about your invitations for people to join the RfC. I've also asked you, at the RfC, to explain why you posted invitations specifically at the WikiProjects for Conservatism and the Latter Day Saint movement both of which have nothing whatsoever to do with the subject of the entry.Griswaldo (talk) 20:05, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
I've reported your latest attack which has crossed the line
Please see Wikipedia:Wikiquette_assistance#User:Lionelt_--_Wikihounding_and_canvassing_to_attack_me. Cheers.Griswaldo (talk) 14:54, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
- Griswaldo's concern is that you are following their edit history and making disparaging comments, such as here. I do agree that the content of that message is pushing edgy - try to comment on content only, not editors. Cheers, m.o.p 16:57, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Importer bot for OpenGlobe
Greetings! Re your thread at OpenGlobe's village pump, I think the community would be interested in having an importer bot set up. Any chance you could provide extra details? [1] Tempodivalse [talk] 20:33, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Timeline of conservatism
I have nominated this article for deletion. I do not see how it could ever be a neutral article, since there is disagreement over what should be included as conservatism and what weight various people/events/organizations deserve. TFD (talk) 04:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
AUL
Hi Lionel, thanks for the comment on my discussion page. Glad you agree the draft is good. Would you mind beint the one to copy and paste the new draft, and possibly leave a note on the AUL discussion page so it's clear to later readers that there was agreement to add the new version? And I think photographs sound like a good idea, I can look into that after the article is updated. Thanks, ProLifeDC (talk) 14:32, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
The Right Stuff: September 2011
By Lionelt
Welcome to the inaugural issue of The Right Stuff, the newsletter of WikiProject Conservatism. The Project has developed at a breakneck speed since it was created on February 12, 2011 with the edit summary, "Let's roll!" With over 50 members the need for a project newsletter is enormous. With over 3000 articles to watch, an active talk page and numerous critical discussions spread over various noticeboards, it has become increasingly difficult to manage the information overload. The goal of The Right Stuff is to help you keep up with the changing landscape.
The Right Stuff is a newsletter consisting of original reporting. Writers will use a byline to "sign" their contributions. Just as with The Signpost, "guidelines such as 'no ownership of articles', and particularly 'no original research', will not necessarily apply."
WikiProject Conservatism has a bright future ahead: this newsletter will allow us tell the story. All that's left to say is: "Let's roll!"
By Lionelt
A new style guide to help standardize editing was rolled out. It focuses on concepts, people and organizations from a conservatism perspective. The guide features detailed article layouts for several types of articles. You can help improve it here. The Project's Article Collaboration currently has two nominations, but they don't appear to be generating much interest. You can get involved with the Collaboration here.
I am pleased to report that we have two new members: Rjensen and Soonersfan168. Rjensen is a professional historian and has access to JSTOR. Soonersfan168 says he is a "young conservative who desires to improve Wikipedia!" Unfortunately we will be seeing less of Geofferybard, as he has announced his semi-retirement. We wish him well. Be sure to stop by their talk pages and drop off some Wikilove.
By Lionelt
On August 3rd Peter Oborne, a British journalist, became the Project's 3,000th tagged article. It is a tribute to the membership that we have come this far this quickly. The latest Featured Article is Richard Nixon. Our congratulations to Wehwalt for a job well done. The article with the most page views was Rick Perry with 887,389 views, not surprising considering he announced he was running for president on August 11th. Following Perry were Michele Bachmann and Tea Party movement. The Project was ranked 75th based on total edits, which is up from 105th in July. The article with the most edits was Republican Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2012 with 374 edits. An RFC regarding candidate inclusion criteria generated much interest on the talk page.
A barnstar for you!
![]() |
The Brilliant Idea Barnstar |
Good job on WP:Conservatism and The Right Stuff, even with a 'malfunctioning' robot. :) Toa Nidhiki05 03:06, 1 October 2011 (UTC) |
Hi Lionelt. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raymond A. Watson, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raymond A. Watson (2nd nomination). Cunard (talk) 00:00, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Conservative parties in Norway
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/1d/Information_icon4.svg/48px-Information_icon4.svg.png)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Ryan Vesey Review me! 21:26, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
thanks
I read your post on my talk page. Thank you. It's rare for me to get positive feedback from people, and it is always appreciated to have a person who will be on my side.
In regards to the Linda McMahon article, I honestly do not think it is possible for anyone to bring it to GA status. The research on her has been pretty good, and after all the work I put into her page and her 2010 Senate campaign, I'm confident the subject has been covered in detail. The page itself has been solid and free from any type of errors/issues for months too. But don't be misled: the issue with the page has always been appeasing users like Collect. Collect, who has contributed nothing to that page except edit wars, is the type of editor who hates me so bad that he argued about her being called a business magnate, agreed to it, lost the argument, gave up, and months later, decided to bring it up again. He regressed the article from covering the Ring Boy Affair and would easily wipe out anything that could possibly be interpreted as negative to her. He's a moron, and he knows it too. The problem is, everytime I prove him wrong, he gets mentally fried, changes the story, and tries to team up with other editors or tries to find some administrative policy that he can weasel into holding his POV. He won't admit to being wrong, and has even written a long-winded essay on why editors shouldn't edit one article in depth because it can indicate undue editing or something like that... Long story short, he won't let it reach GA-status. I personally am a man of principle, and I would rather have an accurate page that readers can learn from, than try to appease the abusive editors of wikipedia to raise it one notch over to GA-status. I promise that anyone who wants to reach success will have to handle his poison, and believe me, even he knows he's a waste of time to talk to.
I know, I'm a bit much for most people to handle. I want to thank you for extending your help, and I will definitely let you know if I am in an editing dispute that may need a third person's point of view. I enjoy politics a lot, so you can expect to see me a lot on wikipedia. I am currently involved a lot on the Republican Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2012. I think this page could reach GA-status next year, but even if it never does, I am not so concerned.--Screwball23 talk 04:54, 3 October 2011 (UTC)