User talk:Fevrret/Archives/2014

Shooting of samantha ramsey

Hello, you don't need to replace one Speedy Delete tag with another, especially if the original tag was the more correct one. In this case, as seen on that article's talk page, the author requested deletion as a duplicate and blanked the page. Both of those make the original tag G7 (author request) correct, and not A3 (no-content). CrowTalk 00:11, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Crow. Sorry for the mistake. Fevrret (talk) 00:12, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No worries at all! CrowTalk 00:16, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia

I'm not exactly sure why you left that message on my Talk page, but as a brand new editor welcome to Wikipedia, Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:17, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Theodoor Gerard van Lidth de Jeude

Hello Fevrret. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Theodoor Gerard van Lidth de Jeude, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 02:42, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion contested: Red Sea Cable

Hello Fevrret. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Red Sea Cable, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 02:51, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please pause

Okay, it looks as though your contributions are inappropriate. Please do not add any more speedy deletion tags to any articles, even the most obvious until you have discussed with more experienced editors what you are doing. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:21, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think that those that I tagged were promotional / non importance. I needed a second opinion. If it was my mistake, then I'll be more careful. Thanks. Fevrret (talk) 09:20, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What's that about your speedy deletion attempts?

It's alright if you have good reasons to suggest speedy deletions but just randomly tagging articles is not very helpful. See my comment on Lidth de Jeude. You may not be a zoologist but other people are and they have their reasons to be interested in 18th century Dutch zoologists, even if you are not. Thanks! Peteruetz (talk) 03:36, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry sir. Will not happen again.

Stubs

Please take care not to add {{stub}} to an article which already has a specific stub tag, as it just wastes other editors' time. Thanks. PamD 05:31, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Sorry sir.

Speedy Deletion Nomination of Illusions Unveiled

When you nominate an article for speedy deletion only add valid tags instead of throwing multiple tags and see which ones apply. You tagged Illusions Unveiled with 4 speedy deletion tags.

WP:A1, this speedy deletion criterion is only used on articles where you can not determine what the article is about. If you could not figure out that this article was about an albun from its very first statement, "Illusions Unveiled is the second album from Norwegian heavy metal act Wellfear" I question your ability to read.
WP:A7, this speedy deletion criterion only applies to articles that are about a "real person, individual animal(s), organization, web content or organized event" Going back to the first statement of the article, it was about an album which is not on that list.
WP:G11, this criterion only applies on "Pages that are exclusively promotional, and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic." The article was a completely factual account of the album. It said it was an album, the release date and track listing, nothing even remotely promotional.
WP:A9, fianally one that applies as the band's article, Wellfear, was deleted in 2011.

Be more careful in the future to only add speedy deletion tags that apply to the article. GB fan 12:17, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Followup after page move

You moved an article from Chris Miles to Chris Miles (character) (I have moved it to the more standard title of Chris Miles (Skins), and created a disambiguation page at Chris Miles. But you have not finished the work: as it says in the page message you get when moving a page, if you create a disambiguation page at a title where there was previously an article, it is your job to fix the incoming links. There are 50-100 incoming links which previously led directly to the article for the Skins character and now do not do so but lead to the dab page: you have damaged the encylopedia for readers following those links.

I have updated the link in the template {{Skins}}, which will fix quite a lot of the links, but you need to sort out the other ones yourself. Please do this, and remember to do so another time you decide to over-write an article at a Primary Topic to create a disambiguation page. Thanks. PamD 13:00, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You gotta know that there's 3 different Chris Miles. Those 3 are notable too. The musician Chris Miles (musician) drags visitors to Wikipedia (see stats). Fevrret (talk) 14:24, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Miles

I'm sorry that you archived this topic so quickly. Your reply doesn't address my main point: you moved an article from Chris Miles to Chris Miles (character), now at Chris Miles (Skins). You created a disambiguation page at Chris Miles. It's your job to fix the incoming links which you have broken by doing so: these links. Please go through them and update them to point to the article at its new title, instead of pointing to the dab page. PamD 18:31, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am working on it. Fevrret (talk) 21:52, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Further: What stats are you looking at when you say "The musician Chris Miles (musician) drags visitors to Wikipedia (see stats)"? I look at the WikiView stats for the last 12 months of "Chris Miles" pageviews and I don't see a sudden increase from June when this young man appears to have become well known. I see no evidence to support your statement.
From June he got signed by Warner Chappell (see references), started working on new music (references will be added) and got on tour with Jake Miller (references will be added). That's why. Fevrret (talk) 21:52, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You haven't answered the question: what stats are you talking about when you say "see stats"? PamD 07:08, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also puzzled: you wrote the article Chris Miles (musician) today but you say that the two references were both retrieved on 27 June (even though the second one is actually dated 28th June). What is going on here? Did you copy the article from somewhere else? Please explain. PamD 21:45, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
How could I copy the article? I wrote it by myself and currently looking for more references in order to finish my article. If you want to collaborate, you can help but let me work on this one. Fevrret (talk) 21:52, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Date retrieved" means the date you consulted an online source while writing the article. Did you really do your research back in June? PamD 07:08, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non Admin Closure

That NAC was absolutely inappropriate. First of all you voted in the discussion. That immediately disqualifies anyone, admin or not, from closing it. Second, as per WP:NAC, which I strongly suggest you read, you're supposed to let the discussion run its full length, 7 days in the case of this. Please please read up on the policy before you dive into a new area. Your enthusiasm is great, but you're going too fast in my opinion, and making some large mistakes in the process. CrowTalk 21:46, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was a mistake, the non-admin disclosure was actually for another article. I reverted my edits. Fevrret (talk) 21:48, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ru:Гусевской хрустальный завод

(cur | prev) 00:24, 7 September 2014‎ Fevrret (talk | contribs)‎ . . (402 bytes) (+32)‎ . . (Nominated page for deletion using Page Curation (speedy deletion-no context)) (undo | thank)

Fevrret, you were asked above to pause using speedy deletion tags until you better understand how they are used. You just added another inappropriate one to the English translation stub of an evidently notable Russian crystal works. Your tag was reverted by admin User:Y. I'm pinging Y for second opinion / comment, but in my view I consider this puts your use of speedy deletion tags over the line into where a formal warning may be needed. In context of all the blanked Talk page content from half a dozen editors which was above. At this point it's a friendly advice - please stop using speedy deletion tags. Another one like any of those refused by admins previously and you should be given a formal warning. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:16, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You might look at these edits. Adding sources, rewording, (expand Russian), add Glass template, cats, Talk page projects, and then click "thank" to editor for starting the stub, leave a Welcome message on new users Talk page. This is the sort of edit you should be doing if you are going to work on new article review. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:30, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fowler's Bluff (band)

What is is this On what grounds are refusing and blanking this new article draft? It seems perfectly okay. Rather better than average in fact. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:34, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It does not meet WP:MUSICBIO. You need to look that there's no notability for this band. And it looks like a press release. At the end of the article, promotes a brand of alcohol or something. Fevrret
There was no reason to blank the draft article. GB fan 01:52, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
GB is an admin by the way. Your response above is not encouraging. Please make no further edits to other editors AFCs of this sort until you demonstrate a better understanding of notability. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:48, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Achraf Baznani (photographer), but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://www.graphicart-news.com/wild-imaginative-surrealism-photography-achraf-baznani/#.VA6vjCinBIA, http://www.baznani.com/about-the-artist/, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Achraf Baznani (photographer) saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:10, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Things

Saw you mention my name so I've looked around a bit. A couple of things:

  1. Here, you really aren't supposed to move other user comments around, even if it might make sense. The reason being that if people reply to various posts, moving what they replied to makes it hard to follow the conversation. Yes Maro was voting many times, which needed to be addressed. The usual way there is to strikethrough like this just the extra keeps, and then leave a note there saying something like "struck multiple votes from the same user". See This one for example of how that should go.
  2. The above does absolutely not excuse those personal attacks that were thrown at you, of course.
  3. On User talk:Pietaster: He is what we call Autopatrolled, meaning that he makes so many new articles, and can be trusted to make good ones, that his articles are automatically marked as reviewed. Un-reviewing them like that is not good, and hopefully he won't take offense, as you're still new at this.

Just a reminder to go slow and consider the Why's as well as the What's for the way things go here. CrowTalk 22:35, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above didn't meet WP:CIV and attacked me directly for being a sock muppet.
Yes I understand that (my point #2 above). CrowTalk 22:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Maromania

How do you know Maromania? Do you know Rojer1212? CrowTalk 21:51, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know Maromania. I just referred that he felt accused too. No, I don't know Rojert1212. --Fevrret (talk) 23:26, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for Disruptive editing and likely abusing multiple accounts. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Randykitty (talk) 11:59, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Fevrret/Archives (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have not created multiple accounts as said. I do not accept this type of behavior Fevrret (talk) 18:33, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

After reviewing the behavioural evidence, I consider it likely that you have abused multiple accounts. PhilKnight (talk) 20:13, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tachfin

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tachfin, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tachfin and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tachfin during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Safiel (talk) 01:20, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Aer (Band) has been accepted

Aer (Band), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Darylgolden(talk) 07:48, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]