User:The Bipolar Anon-IP Gnome/sandbox
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Sockpuppet broadcasts
Hello, The Bipolar Anon-IP Gnome ... my request for intervention at WP:AN/I#User:867xx5209 and personal attacks by their sock/meatpuppets regarding the personal attacks against me by 867xx5209 (talk · contribs) on the DRV page for CLSA (and several article discussion pages) is being ignored ... is it because I'm using an IP account? I have also discovered that I cannot post the complaint that I have been documenting about their activities onto the Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets project as an IP account. <Sigh!>
I'm asking you, and a few other admins who are familiar with this incident, for any advice/assistance that you can render ... please reply on my current talk page so as not to fragment comments by others ... BTW, my recent inactivity (and possibly slow response) are due to a medical emergency involving a family member. Thnx! —72.75.85.234 22:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I have been documenting a case of sock/meatpuppets against a user in the sandbox User:The Bipolar Anon-IP Gnome/sockpuppets (started before my IP was reset by a power failure), but as 867xx5209 (talk · contribs) they have been posting personal attacks against me on article talk pages (see Talk:Gary Coull and Talk:Jing Ulrich) and the deletion review for an article (see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 June 23#CLSA), accusing me of intentionally changing my IP address/username, when both my talk page and others linked to it make it very clear that my DSL connection changes at random intervals (as it did just a few days ago)
OTOH, this edit shows that they have been using both a registered account and an IP account to make their malicious edits against me at the same time ... I have tried to move our discussions into user space, but they (a) have not left any messages on my talk page, and (b) have not responded to messages left on any of their various talk pages.
Throughout this incident, I have tried to maintain Civility, but after their latest attack, I decided that I should probably post something here. —72.75.85.234 (talk · contribs) 17:49, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Testing templates with (People)
- Using
{{Warn-article}}with (People), e.g.
{{subst:Warn-article|Lynn Huggins - Cooper|People|header=1}} —~~~~
[edit] Notice: This article lacks WP:A to establish WP:BIO
In my opinion, this article either lacks sufficient Attribution that it satisfies the Notability criteria for Biographies, or it may violate the Conflict of interest guideline, or perhaps it is a Copyright violation.
Wikipedia articles must be based on reliable sources to verify any claims of notability. Even though the lack of reliable source attribution in an article is not grounds for deletion in itself, an article with absolutely no sources (or only external links to unreliable ones) suggests to some editors that multiple reliable sources may not, in fact, exist.
Although I am considering tagging this article for deletion according to the Deletion policy, I am nonetheless willing to assist User:Lynn Huggins - Cooper (talk · contribs), and other recent contributors to this article, to make constructive improvements to it ... I do not have time to examine this article in depth at the moment, and it may improve over time, in which case this warning was premature.
Please respond on this Discussion page, instead of on my Talk page, in order to avoid fragmenting the conversation. —72.75.72.63 (talk) 03:03, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- Using
{{Warn-editor}}with (People), e.g.
{{subst:Warn-editor|Lynn Huggins-Cooper|People|header=1}} —~~~~
[edit] Flagging Lynn Huggins-Cooper for further review
Hello, The Bipolar Anon-IP Gnome … I recently encountered the article about Lynn Huggins-Cooper and in my opinion, it either lacks sufficient Attribution that it satisfies the Notability criteria for Biographies, or it may violate the Conflict of interest guideline, or perhaps it violates a copyright.
I am considering tagging for deletion according to the Deletion policy … I do not have time to examine the article in depth at the moment, and it may improve over time, in which case this warning was premature.
I have created this initial entry on your Talk page because you are either the original author of the article, or else a recent contributor to it; I will leave more detailed information regarding my specific concerns about the article on its Discussion page … please respond either there or on this Talk page, instead of on my Talk page, in order to avoid fragmenting the conversation.
I do not mean to imply that your contribution is unappreciated … perhaps you should read Your first article … and remember, there was a time when I knew less about how Wikipedia works than you know right now, and I am always available to help you become a more proactive contributor. —72.75.72.63 (talk) 03:06, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Selected filmography
As per Wikipedia is not a collection of lists, I have reduced the Filmography section of to just the films that have Wikipedia articles, and renamed it to Selected filmography ... people can click the IMDb External link that follows the section to see the subject's full filmography with links to information about each of their films.
Please see the template's talk page for examples of using the {{Imdb name}}, {{Imdb title}}, {{Tvtome person}}, and {{Tvtome show}} templates.
I have also used [[19xx in film|19xx]] tags for the years of the films, since [[19xx]] has little encyclopedic value.
Anonymous edits without comments may be reverted by anyone.
I am placing this boilerplate message on this Discussion page before I actually make the changes, so that I can just put "see Discussion page" in the edit summary, and hopefully not have my edit summarily reverted as vandalism by Some Other Editor.
[edit] Flagging Ariana Ghez for further review
Hello, The Bipolar Anon-IP Gnome … I recently encountered the article about Ariana Ghez and in my opinion, it either lacks sufficient Attribution that it satisfies the Notability criteria for Web content, or it may violate the Conflict of interest guideline, or perhaps it violates a copyright.
I am considering tagging for deletion according to the Deletion policy … I do not have time to examine the article in depth at the moment, and it may improve over time, in which case this warning was premature.
I have created this initial entry on your Talk page because you are either the original author of the article, or else a recent contributor to it; I will leave more detailed information regarding my specific concerns about the article on its Discussion page … please respond either there or on this Talk page, instead of on my Talk page, in order to avoid fragmenting the conversation.
Be sure to read Ownership of articles, and remember that other editors may not share your opinion about the notability of the article's subject.
I do not mean to imply that your contribution is unappreciated … perhaps you should read Your first article … and remember, there was a time when I knew less about how Wikipedia works than you know right now, and I am always available to help you become a more proactive contributor. Happy Editing! — 72.75.110.142 (talk) 22:10, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Removal of speedy deletion tag
Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles. If you do not believe the article deserves to be deleted, then please do the following:
- Place {{hangon}} on the page directly below the deletion tag. Please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag(s).
- Make your case on the article's talk page.
Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. ... DO NOT remove the {{Db}} tag yourself! I have restored it ... please read Wikipedia:Three-revert rule and don't do it again, or you may get blocked from editing here. — The Bipolar Anon-IP Gnome (talk) 22:28, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
