User talk:TracyLinkEdnaVelmaPenny
Page contents not supported in other languages.
Welcome!
Hello, TracyLinkEdnaVelmaPenny, andwelcome to Wikipedia! Thank you foryour contributions{{#if:I Am Legend (film)|. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being aWikipedian! Pleasesign your messages ondiscussion pages using fourtildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check outWikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place{{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!
I have nominatedDrag Me to Hell, an article you created, fordeletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Drag Me to Hell. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Collectonian (talk)21:54, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed onAviva Farber requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done undersection 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 thecriteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Pleasesee the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specificnotability guideline for biographies.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding{{hangon}} tothe top ofthe page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note onthe article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged forspeedy 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.Collectonian (talk)21:54, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
haha nice nameElisaEXPLOSiONtalk.14:25, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please useedit summaries. It is considered rude not to do so. Thank you.Ward3001 (talk)16:14, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please useedit summaries. It is considered rude not to do so. Edits without edit summaries are subject to being reverted.Ward3001 (talk)22:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is the umpteenth time you've been informed that the use of{{flagicon}}s are to be avoided in film articles perWikipedia:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines#Release dates. Same for "Year in film" links. Yet you persist in adding them to every film article you come across. I won't even say you're encouraged to work on articles anymore, since you refuse to engage in discussion with other editors who are just trying to help you. You realize that continuing to make these edits knowing they are contrary to guidelines without the courtesy of discussing them constitutes vandalism, so apparently you won't mind being blocked again. Keep in mind there are editors who monitor every edit you make to ensure we can clean up your messes. Our patience has expired.
Jim Dunning |talk02:03, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You continue to remove maintenance tags without explanation and with no attempt to first fix the problems they alert readers and editors to. You were informed of the problems associated with this on02/01/2008 after you systematically removed cites-needed and sources-needed maintenance tags from a number of film articles, includingThe Birds andHairspray. You again removed{{Refimprove}} and{{Trivia}} tagstoday immediately after being warned about other edits contrary to guidelines. Your behavior constitutes deliberate vandalism.
Jim Dunning |talk05:13, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please useedit summaries. It is considered rude not to do so. Edits without edit summaries are subject to being reverted.Ward3001 (talk)16:15, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did toThe Fifth Element, you will beblocked from editing. - such deletions require discussion and consensus, and an edit summary would help. --Rodhullandemu (Talk)01:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please useedit summaries. It is considered rude not to do so. Edits without edit summaries are subject to being reverted.Ward3001 (talk)02:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is thelast warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you delete or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did toKing Kong (2005 film), youwill beblocked from editing.Ward3001 (talk)04:49, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 | This account has been confirmed by aCheckUser as asockpuppet ofAshTFrankFurter2 (talk ·contribs ·logs), and has beenblocked indefinitely. Please refer to editing habits orcontributions of the sockpuppet for evidence.This policy subsection may be helpful. Account information:block log –contribs –logs –abuse log –CentralAuth –SI |  |
A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleScott Gerbacia is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should bedeleted.
The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott Gerbacia until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.Skr15081997 (talk)12:38, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleQueen Sized is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should bedeleted.
The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Queen Sized (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.Jalen D. Folf(talk)04:39, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleNate Hartley is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according toWikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should bedeleted.
The article will be discussed atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nate Hartley until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.Bearcat (talk)16:16, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The articleBeautiful Loser (film) has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non-notable film, no independent coverage, perWP:NF
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may bedeleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the{{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in youredit summary or onthe article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing{{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. In particular, thespeedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andarticles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion.BOVINEBOY200823:29, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The articleThomas E. Ackerman has beenproposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. UnderWikipedia policy, thisbiography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to areliable source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, seeReferencing for beginners, or ask at thehelp desk. Once you have provided at least onereliable source, you may remove the{{prod blp/dated}} tag.Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one.Helen(let’s talk)00:02, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The articleJason Filardi has beenproposed for deletion because of the following concern:
WP:Notability concerns: Noreliable sources in the article since its creation in 2007, and while he has been associated with some notable works and I can find passing mentions in print sources, I don't see any indication that there is sufficient coverage to sustain aBLP
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may bedeleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the{{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in youredit summary or onthe article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing{{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop theproposed deletion process, but otherdeletion processes exist. In particular, thespeedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, andarticles for deletion allows discussion to reachconsensus for deletion. --Blablubbs (talk)18:23, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]