User talk:70.116.31.203

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please stop attempting to speedily delete webcomics. Vandalism will get you blocked. --Martin Wisse 13:03, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

fudge off. they are clearly not notable. 70.116.31.203 13:04, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello 70.116.31.203. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue that you may be involved with. You are free to comment at the discussion, but please remember to keep your comments within the bounds of the civility and "no personal attack" policies. Thank you.

Please stop adding speedy deletion tags - at a rate of 1 o2 a minute you are clearly not taking the time to assess the articles and appear to be making a WP:POINT, which makes your edits vandalism. (Emperor 13:17, 31 October 2007 (UTC))

I am going through all of them and seeing if they make an assertion of notability. if not, they get the tag. try reading up on notability. 70.116.31.203 13:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm perfectly aware of notability - the standard approach is to tag entries of concern with {{notability}} and if they haven't been addressed after a few months then WP:PROD is. Either that or nominate them as an WP:AFD. Speedy deletion should only be used on "limited cases" and the articles you've been tagging don't qualify. Please make sure you are fully familiar with policy before making such drastic moves. (Emperor 13:27, 31 October 2007 (UTC))
wasting months on something that is clearly not notable is tomfoolery. they do not assert notability therefore are valid a7 material. 70.116.31.203 13:28, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
a7 says "is distinct from questions of notability, verifiability and reliability of sources" and if controversial list as AfD. Some of the articles are rated as GA - did you not think tagging them (and dozens of others all in one day) wouldn't be seen as controversial? I'm sorry that you aren't prepared to put the time into trying to improve articles and separate the wheat from the chaff but that doesn't mean you can try and force your opinion on everyone else. (Emperor 14:09, 31 October 2007 (UTC))
Rolling back. WP:POINT applies here as well. Spryde 14:07, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Rolled back again. use {{hangon}} if you disagree with a deletion. 70.116.31.203 14:08, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
You have reverted some articles twice (like Salamander Sam) and three reverts looms, so think carefully about future edits. (Emperor 14:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC))
Yeah, because proxies are sooooo hard to find... 70.116.31.203 14:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Please start an AFD discussion these comics. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 14:09, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
That'd be great if I could... 70.116.31.203 14:09, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
You can if you get an account, which is easy as hell, by the way. JuJube 14:23, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. JuJube 14:24, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Come to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents and argue your case. But stop with the speedy deletion notes for now. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 14:26, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CSD tags

I've read the above, and I understand your reasoning, but going about this by placing CSD tags on 50+ articles in a matter of minutes is not a good idea. I've removed the tag from A Miracle of Science because this is an established article from early 2006, and CSD is not appropriate. I echo the concerns of all the other editors and administrators who have warned you here that your actions indicate you are trying to make a point and it is disruptive. I suggest that you register an account, and take these issues to AFD instead of slapping CSD tags on all these articles, some of which are not valid. Thanks. Ariel♥Gold 14:27, 31 October 2007 (UTC)


Sorry I meant to say come to here and argue your case. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 14:32, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

24 hours for multiple WP:3RR violations. Time to slow it down and discuss the issue rather than disruptively edit warring.--Isotope23 talk 14:57, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Further information

I'd just like to take the time to make you aware of the issues with your actions. I've gone through some (obviously not all, as you A7'd more than 40 articles) of your tag placements, and as a neutral observer, who is not at all interested in, or familiar with, web comics, I would say that some of the tags were justified. However, I also know that to place CSD tags on over 15 articles in 10 minutes, means that you didn't take the time to evaluate the articles, to research to see if they were notable, or to read through the full articles to see if notability was established.

This seems evident in your placement of CSD tags on Jack (webcomic), which has won numerous web awards, including Best Dramatic Comic at the Web Cartoonist's Choice Awards; Dresden Codak, which has been nominated for a Web Cartoonist's Choice Awards; and Mom's Cancer, which won the comic industry's Eisner Award for Best Digital Comic (And this is just to name a few out of the first few you tagged). A7 is generally for people, organizations, and websites. These comics are on websites, but they are not the site itself, Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Explanations notes: A7: Unremarkable people, groups (vanity pages), companies and websites. The appropriate action for articles that fall outside of a CSD criteria is either a {{prod}}, or AFD.

Additionally, you replaced the CSD tags after other editors (more than one) removed them. Then you warned editors about removing CSD tags. I think that perhaps you misunderstand the policy. Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion states: "Any user who is not the creator of a page may remove a speedy tag from it. The creator may not do this; a creator who disagrees with the speedy deletion should instead add {{hangon}} to the page, and explain the rationale on the page's discussion page." The only time it is appropriate to warn someone for removing CSD tags is when the original author removed it, which in all of your tags, was not the case. If you place a CSD, and another editor unrelated to the article removes it, you should not just revert them. Take the issue to the talk page, prod the article or add a notability tag, or take it to AFD. This helps to preserve harmony in the community, and to avoid edit-warring and three revert rule violations. Now, I have no idea what your motivation is for tagging of so many articles in the Category:Webcomics in such a short time, or what your reasons are for wanting all these webcomics removed from Wikipedia, and really it doesn't matter. What matters is that you realize that there are alternate, probably more diplomatic and effective ways to go about removing non-notable articles. I hope that this information is helpful, and when you return, I hope that you'll take the time to review articles before deciding whether to CSD, Prod, or AFD them, to help you work in harmony with others. Cheers, Ariel♥Gold 16:55, 31 October 2007 (UTC)