User talk:Melbrooksfan101/Archive 3

The Nickelodeon WikiProject Newsletter

Volume 1, Issue 2 • February 2008

Collaboration of the Month Our collaboration of the month is to get Nickelodeon's article to GA status (FA would be even better!) Nickelodeon (TV channel) News and Notes Please help with the collaboration of the month! If you would like to unsubscribe, please request it on this issue's talk page (linked above). This newsletter is now MONNTHLY. What we need to edit Watch out for vandalism! Please make sure no one edits a table if they don't know how to edit one (if they do, either revert it or fix it). Thank you for reading this week's newsletter! Delivery courtesy DeliveryBot. Thanks DB!

DeliveryBot (talk) 00:48, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Your request about a problem on the article on ATWT--thank you for asking for my help, but: I've 1) never seen this article 2) do not have any idea of the difference between "recurring" and "current" cast members 3) have never watched the show in question 4) would rather not get involved in an editorial diaagreement on a subject on which I know absolutely nothing.

I suggest: edit the article to the way you think it should be with appropiate references; should the editor change the list again, leave a message on the talk page of the article plus the editor's talk page explaining the difference between the 2 lists and showing that you have a verifiable reliable reference. I suggest a message on the editor's talk page rather than a vandal warning, this may not be a clear case of "vandalism" but rather "Unintentional misinformation"; try to establish a dialogue -- it just may work. You may want to read [[1]] for more tips. JeanColumbia (talk) 10:19, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I've been thinking about this situation and I have one more suggestion: should there be further conflict, you might consider raising the issue on the talk page of the project WP:SOAPS, here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Soap Operas. JeanColumbia (talk) 12:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Little me NB.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Craig mont.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Craig mont.jpg is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Craig mont.jpg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 23:30, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading Image:Brook-sam.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 07:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Mary-book1.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 18:53, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Cosmic Radio, 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 Cosmic Radio. Closedmouth (talk) 04:04, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Tyler Perry Family Trees requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 07:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Marriage-counsler.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading Image:Marriagecounsler.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Diary-image.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 05:16, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Marriage-counsler.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 07:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Scripts and Scruples, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.scriptsandscruples.com/cast.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 02:16, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article John Paul Hunter, 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 John Paul Hunter. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:03, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Blake Whitney requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Carom (talk) 03:16, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Adriana Cummings, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adriana Cummings. Thank you. Corvus cornix_talk 03:24, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very very few podcasts are notable. You haven't given any indications that this is one is one of the notable ones. And an article on every non-notable character? Please. You haven't even provided any sources except the podcast's own website. Corvus cornix_talk 03:33, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. Let the AfD's run their courses. Corvus cornix_talk 03:35, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Put what back on? Corvus cornix_talk 03:36, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Scripts and Scruples. 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. Corvus cornix_talk 03:38, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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 Adriana Cummings. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. Corvus cornix_talk 03:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My being or not being an admin has no bearing on my right and responsiblity to tag non-notable articles for deletion discussion, and to place warnings on your Talk page for removing afd tags. Have a problem with it, take to WP:ANI, but they'll tell you the same thing. Corvus cornix_talk 03:49, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination of Passions for deletion was a WP:POINT violation. Knock it off, or I'll be forced to report you for vandalism. Corvus cornix_talk 03:50, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're not supposed to put a warning on my page, you're supposed to put the warning on the Talk pages of users who have done the most editing of the article you're nominating for deletion. But that's neither here not there:

Hello, Melbrooksfan101. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Corvus cornix_talk 03:58, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated Blake Whitney (S&S character), an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blake Whitney (S&S character) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 03:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated Gregory Walker (S&S character), an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gregory Walker (S&S character) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated Scripts and Scruples, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scripts and Scruples and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated John Paul Hunter, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Paul Hunter and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:RS. That gives you an indication as to what sources prove a subject's notability. The podcast's website does not qualify. Corvus cornix_talk 04:01, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of the notability of the S&S articles, your afd tag on Passions was clearly in bad faith and retaliatory. It was on a major network for 8 years. That you personally hadn't heard of it does not matter. Don't do this again. — Rlevse • Talk • 04:11, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Scripts and Scruples, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. seicer | talk | contribs 14:10, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First of all you put socks on your feet. Second I don not think this is right. There are peopele deleteing pages and your worried about me. I lost my password for my other accounts. I have already been blocked for having more than one page. Melbrooksfan101 talk 22:55, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Read. You were blocked because you're a proven troublemaker. HalfShadow (talk) 22:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When will I be unblocked? Melbrooksfan101 talk 23:02, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How long do you think you'll live? HalfShadow (talk) 23:03, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mena? Melbrooksfan101 talk 23:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He means you, and your other accounts, have been blocked indefinitely. Snowfire51 (talk) 23:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know but I was reading that page and it says you can get unblocked. Melbrooksfan101 talk 23:11, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on John Paul Hunter, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DarkAudit (talk) 02:46, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Gregory Walker (S&S character), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DarkAudit (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Blake Whitney (S&S character), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DarkAudit (talk) 02:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you do this. I've already been blocked before for the sock puppetry. Melbrooksfan101 talk 02:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]