| Revision as of 06:14, 17 July 2011 editFæ (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers83,148 edits →Disruptive use of speedy deletion notices: r← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:17, 17 July 2011 edit undoBigDwiki (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users25,474 edits Look in mirror before making attacks and threats. WP:AGFNext edit → | ||
| Line 117: | Line 117: | ||
| Hello BigDwiki. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of ], a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''Contains sufficient content to be a stub.''' Thank you. — ] <sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub> 04:48, 17 July 2011 (UTC) | Hello BigDwiki. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of ], a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''Contains sufficient content to be a stub.''' Thank you. — ] <sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub> 04:48, 17 July 2011 (UTC) | ||
| == Disruptive use of speedy deletion notices == | |||
| Hi, | |||
| Examining your talk page and contribution history I am concerned that you have a repeated long term pattern of applying A1, A3 and A7 speedy deletion tags to new articles without complying with the CSD policy (as explained multiple times above), this now represents ]. I strongly recommend you cease using these deletion tags until you are prepared to comply with the policy. Should you persist with a pattern of incorrect use of incorrect speedy deletion notices and thereby ignoring the multiple explanations from many other contributors you have already received, then your account may be blocked. Thanks ] (]) 05:02, 17 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::You should be quite a bit more polite to a user simply trying to improve the project. Over 500 edits I have made, and there are only 14 declined tags. Whether it has been tagged as A3, or A7...its is still not notable and should be deleted. Almost all of the pages I have tagged (see some at ]) were tagged correctly and were deleted. Several were tagged incorrectly. After seeing that, I simply changed the tag and it was deleted, although it should have been deleted without all the extra work of having to decline the CSD, then re-add the tag, then actually delete it. What exactly do you mean by "repeated long term pattern"? 14/505 edits? Four days of doing CSDs is "long term"? Regardless, this was obviously not "disruptive editing", and threatening an obviously well-intended editor with a block is completely against ]. Please read the policy yourself before making block threats. --] (]) 05:14, 17 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::The multiple above notices and discussions have been polite but you have continued to misuse tags, there is a time when it is appropriate to draw the line with disruptive behaviour. There are now 50 CSDs on your log and you admit to 14 that do not comply with policy, I have not checked whether other deleted articles were deleted on different grounds to your tag. Misusing the CSD tags incorrectly 28% of the time is not acceptable. I have assumed that you are well-intentioned, this does not change the fact that the policy should be complied with and your misuse of tags is creating significant work for other contributors and putting off new editors from contributing to the encyclopaedia. Thanks ] (]) 05:25, 17 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::There are a whole lot more CSDs than those that appear on the log. Notice that I say '''some''' appear on the log, that isn't even the start of it. Probably less than 1% of my CSDs were not perfect. If you'd like, I could go through your edit history and talk page and point out every mistake that you have ever made. You need to read the following policies to start ], ]. In your RFA process, it was pointed out that you too misused the CSD tags and countless other times. one was added less than a minute after creation, and you did that today. So, before you go ]ing a user who is making good-faith edits and making block threats, you should read the policies a bit more clearly and see that you too are not perfect. --] (]) 05:42, 17 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::::I pointed out that if your pattern of misuse of CSD tags continues then your account may be blocked, this is not a threat, it is a statement of fact. Your figure of 1% is not credible, for a start you would need a minimum of 1,400 edits and every one of these would need to be a CSD notice. Rather than analysing the whole of your edit history, you might want to carefully review the last 24 hours in which period you have raised many speedy deletion notices such as those on ], ] and ]. By the way, criticising me for raising a valid A7 within 10 minutes of an article creation demonstrates that you have not yet understood the policy. Thanks ] (]) 05:56, 17 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::And if your pattern of abuse continues, ''you too'' may be blocked. Nothing new there. I have no more "misuse of CSD tags" than you do. It was not a valid A7, as the creator may have been still in the process of improving it. It constitutes a ] violation. --] (]) 06:00, 17 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::Also, since you refuse to read the policy yourself, you will see that it says '''"though there is no set time requirement, a ten-minute delay before tagging under this criterion is suggested as good practice."''' --] (]) 06:02, 17 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::Not sure how you might know what I am refusing to do, could you supply a diff for that? Attacking me does not help your case. The consensus on the 10 minute delay is a compromise to ensure that new article creators are shown sufficient good faith. Any repeated pattern of edits against consensus, particularly where there is a history of feedback as seen on this talk page, may be treated as disruptive editing. ] (]) 06:14, 17 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == Speedy deletion declined: ] == | == Speedy deletion declined: ] == | ||
Revision as of 06:17, 17 July 2011
BigDwiki 
|
|
|
 |
|
|
| Home | Talk | Contribs | Edit Count | Sandbox |
| This is BigDwiki's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
| This is BigDwiki's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
July 2011
Hello BigDwiki. Thanks for patrolling new pages - it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know however, regarding Vincent"Young V"Arnold, that tagging articles for speedy deletion moments after creation as lacking context (CSD A1) or content (CSD A3), and articles being created through Article Wizard, is too fast. It's best to wait at least 10 - 15 minutes for more content to be added, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), and copyright violations (G12) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:49, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up! I'll be a bit more conservative while tagging. But shouldn't someone have their article together before creating the page...such as using a sandbox?BigDwiki (talk) 07:52, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
- I undersatand but the recommendations are clear for A1 and A3. We currently have no requirements for articles to be prepared in user space. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:09, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 05:00, 13 July 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Novice7 (talk) 05:00, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
{{subst:db-userreq-notice|User:BigDwiki/User:BigDwiki/CSDLog|nowelcome=|{{{key1}}}={{{value1}}}}} BigDwiki (talk) 05:11, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Halloween Knight
Hello BigDwiki, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Halloween Knight, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: CSD A7 does not apply to a fiction character, Halloween Knight is not a real person. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Fæ (talk) 05:47, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
- Hi. What CSD reason, if any, fits that page? --BigDwiki (talk) 05:54, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
- None, for such articles about what you believe are non-notable fictional characters the best option is to use a WP:PROD and explain why it fails to meet WP:GNG (due to a lack of available sources demonstrating sufficient impact). Cheers Fæ (talk) 06:16, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
- Hi. What CSD reason, if any, fits that page? --BigDwiki (talk) 05:54, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Esther Pasztory
Hello BigDwiki. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Esther Pasztory, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A1 should not be used in the first 10 minutes of article creation. This article is no longer suitable for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fæ (talk) 07:39, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
NPP
Hi BigDwiki. You appear to be still having problems identifying the correct deletion templates to use. Do follow my recommendation to read WP:NPP (it's easier to understand than WP:DELETION or WP:CSD), and if there's anything I can do to help, please don't hesitate to ask. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:53, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
User:Electromagnetictop
I'm curious. This user has recently added an anti-vandalism barnstar to his user page with your signature on it. I can't find any evidence that you gave it to him, or that he ever engaged in removing vandalism.
Did you really give him a barnstar? If so, for what?
Thanks. APL (talk) 19:14, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Page history confirms he never awarded it to him. Calabe1992 (talk) 19:29, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
- It looks like the typical vandal, just copied over some of my userboxes and added that barnstar to try to taunt. No worries, wasn't me! I have only added that barnstar to a few users that reverted vandalism faster than I! --BigDwiki (talk) 03:11, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion contested: Nikkomarasigan.com
Hello BigDwiki, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Nikkomarasigan.com, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. --Σ contribs 05:13, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
- I have corrected the CSD to a more appropriate tag. --BigDwiki (talk) 05:18, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
- Cheater.
--Σ contribs 05:20, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
- I notice that quite a few experience editors have already approached you about speedy deletions. In my opinion, the easiest-to-read CSD guide is this one, which gives what falls under which criterion, very plainly and quickly. --Σ contribs 05:31, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
- Also, a bit of advice: When in doubt, call it a test page. --Σ contribs 05:32, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
- Great page, reading it now! --BigDwiki (talk) 05:35, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
- Also, a bit of advice: When in doubt, call it a test page. --Σ contribs 05:32, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
- I notice that quite a few experience editors have already approached you about speedy deletions. In my opinion, the easiest-to-read CSD guide is this one, which gives what falls under which criterion, very plainly and quickly. --Σ contribs 05:31, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
- Cheater.
- I have corrected the CSD to a more appropriate tag. --BigDwiki (talk) 05:18, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Shwikar Khanum Effendi
Hello BigDwiki. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Shwikar Khanum Effendi, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: More than likely, a notable person. Article exists on at least two other Wikipedias. Thank you. Courcelles 21:16, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
- The article contains 4 words and a photo. It was declined per A1, and now declined again. How is the article deserving to stay in its current state? --BigDwiki (talk) 21:18, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
- It doesn't, but it can be fixed through normal editing, and not use of the deletion tool. Courcelles 21:21, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
- The article contains 4 words and a photo. It was declined per A1, and now declined again. How is the article deserving to stay in its current state? --BigDwiki (talk) 21:18, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello BigDwiki. You tagged "Cessation (band)" for speedy deletion, but you did not notify the article's creator that it had been so tagged. There is strong consensus that the creators of articles tagged for speedy deletion should be warned and that the person placing the tag has that responsibility. All of the major speedy deletion templates contain a pre-formatted warning for this purpose—just copy and paste to the creator's talk page. Thank you.Template:Z19 —DoRD (talk) 22:20, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Glee: The 3D Concert Movie (film)
Hello BigDwiki. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Glee: The 3D Concert Movie (film), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 22:50, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Kristall Berdsk
Hello BigDwiki. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Kristall Berdsk, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Plays in a notable league, enough to dodge the A7. Thank you. Courcelles 22:55, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Cosmic Suckerpunch
Hello BigDwiki. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Cosmic Suckerpunch, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article claims coverage in reliable sources. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 23:46, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Peter Bluckert
Hello BigDwiki. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Peter Bluckert, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not an unambiguous copyright infringement, or there is other content to save. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 23:52, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Democratic Party of Somalia
Hello BigDwiki. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Democratic Party of Somalia, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 02:11, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- The log shows "22:05, July 16, 2011 Malik Shabazz (talk | contribs) deleted "Democratic Party of Somalia" (A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject (CSDH))" ?? --BigDwiki (talk) 04:34, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- That probably indicates that you tagged it under A1 when it should have been tagged under A7. Ryan Vesey contribs 04:35, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- Ah yes, that could be! --BigDwiki (talk) 04:36, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- I think that's just what happened. After I declined your A1 request, you re-tagged it as A7. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 04:40, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- Ah yes, that could be! --BigDwiki (talk) 04:36, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- That probably indicates that you tagged it under A1 when it should have been tagged under A7. Ryan Vesey contribs 04:35, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- The log shows "22:05, July 16, 2011 Malik Shabazz (talk | contribs) deleted "Democratic Party of Somalia" (A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject (CSDH))" ?? --BigDwiki (talk) 04:34, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Kansas City Royals Baseball Academy
Hello BigDwiki. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Kansas City Royals Baseball Academy, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 03:31, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
¡Como el chiste! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sgorbalan (talk • contribs) 04:29, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Alex eve
Hello BigDwiki. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Alex eve, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A3 should not be used within 10 minutes of article creation. Thank you. Fæ (talk) 04:45, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- Come on, this should totally have been deleted under A3. The reasoning for not using A3 within 10 minutes of creation is that editors may be improving the page. This article was not meant to be improved upon and constitutes vandalism. Ryan Vesey contribs 04:47, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- I changed the deletion notice to A7, I rejected A3 as in less than 60 seconds after article creation, there is no way for anyone to guess whether the creator might be improving the page. If I missed some dialogue that related to the page and the intentions of the creator (or others) then please do point it out. Thanks Fæ (talk) 05:05, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- Why didn't you just delete it, as it was obviously meeting a qualification for being deleted. Instead of spending so much time worrying about if the correct tag was applied (there are dozens), it should be deleted. --BigDwiki (talk) 05:18, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- I think my problem came more in the warning you left. A situation like this would have been better handled (in my opinion), with a note on why articles shouldn't be tagged with A3 or A1 right after creation. I don't believe the tag was necessarily incorrect either, just early. Ryan Vesey contribs 05:31, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- If I may offer my 2¢ as the admin who deleted the article: I deleted it because it was titled "Alex eve" and created by Alex Even, and because it consisted solely of a link to a photo. If Alex Even intended to write an encyclopedia article, my deleting that link didn't get in the way of writing such an article. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 05:40, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- I think my problem came more in the warning you left. A situation like this would have been better handled (in my opinion), with a note on why articles shouldn't be tagged with A3 or A1 right after creation. I don't believe the tag was necessarily incorrect either, just early. Ryan Vesey contribs 05:31, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- Why didn't you just delete it, as it was obviously meeting a qualification for being deleted. Instead of spending so much time worrying about if the correct tag was applied (there are dozens), it should be deleted. --BigDwiki (talk) 05:18, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- I changed the deletion notice to A7, I rejected A3 as in less than 60 seconds after article creation, there is no way for anyone to guess whether the creator might be improving the page. If I missed some dialogue that related to the page and the intentions of the creator (or others) then please do point it out. Thanks Fæ (talk) 05:05, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Colonel Thomas Gay
Hello BigDwiki. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Colonel Thomas Gay, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Contains sufficient content to be a stub. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 04:48, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Hola! Jr
Hello BigDwiki. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Hola! Jr, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 06:02, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Hola! Jr
Hello BigDwiki. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Hola! Jr, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A children's channel run by MTV Networks is probably notable. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz /Stalk 06:08, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
- A google of the name turns up no official results. There are no results whatsoever for it. I do not see where it is run by MTV, and the page is in terrible shape. --BigDwiki (talk) 06:11, 17 July 2011 (UTC)