Jesusokittay94
A tag has been placed on Xtw, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read our the guidelines on spam as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy 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. —BoL 05:04, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Xtw, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read our the guidelines on spam as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy 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. —BoL 05:09, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
January 2008
edit Please stop. If you continue to introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, such as Xtw, you will be blocked from editing. and if you want to be like what WWE is right now, I suggest you stop. —BoL 05:11, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you remove a speedy deletion notice from a page, as you did with Xtw, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. —BoL 05:12, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
- And do you even know how to write a neutral article? read this. —BoL 05:45, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- If you read it, it's not neutral. More in the sense of advertising. If you want to, you can try to put it up but it must be in a neutral POV, not an advertisement, and in the proper format. (check at link from comment above this one by "BoL") --Esanchez(Talk 2 me or Sign here) 06:05, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Xtw requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, 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 the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy 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. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 06:06, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you create an inappropriate page, such as Xtw, you will be blocked from editing. --Esanchez(Talk 2 me or Sign here) 06:07, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yep, I would recommend you recreated it NPOV, or Esanchez whacks you. —BoL 06:08, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
I recreated xtw but i did it NPOV because u said that is what i should of done
Jesusokittay94 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I did recreate that page. But i did recreate it NPOV to have it stand on wkipedia, this was very important i took requests to write unbiasedly but he still blocked me. i believe this block was unlawful, and unjust
Decline reason:
You repeatedly recreated the page six times by my count. Wikipedia is not free webhosting and is not for things made up in school one day. If you add articles about yourself, your friends, or the like, they will be deleted. It's unfortunate that only the standard templates were used rather than explaining this content policy to you or that BoL gave you the bad advice to recreate it - please see our notability guidelines for more information about the kinds of articles that are acceptable. If you will promise not to recreate this article again and to read our three core content policies WP:NPOV, WP:NOR, and WP:V, along with WP:RS and WP:N before creating any new content, I will remove your block if the blocking admin consents. — B (talk) 22:04, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
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.
What are you talking about, made up in school one day. XTW is very well known. I believe this is age discrimination. dispite what you say, I recreated that page NPOV and up to wikipedia's standards. I still believe that you think that the way i recreated that page was treated wrong. What Im saying is that this is still unfair treatment any way you look at this.
- This is NOT age discrimination. Are you a minor? If so, I am too. Even if you did recreate it NPOV, you need hardcore refs, you know what I mean? And as for advice, I didn't really give him the green light to recreate it, I only told him to recreate it in a way that's NPOV, notable, and not spam. —BoL 01:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Something you are both missing is the general notability guideline. If there are multiple reliable sources of information independent of the subject itself, it is notable. If there aren't, then it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Has the news media taken note of this organization? If not, Wikipedia isn't the place for it. --B (talk) 01:39, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- I agree. I was going to start an essay on how users who use Wikipedia as a soapbox see a bleak future for their organization or business, but not to discourage editing, but can't because of my topic ban. Yeah...so don't use Wikipedia for advertising or your company/organization/something may see a bleak future. —BoL 01:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Something you are both missing is the general notability guideline. If there are multiple reliable sources of information independent of the subject itself, it is notable. If there aren't, then it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Has the news media taken note of this organization? If not, Wikipedia isn't the place for it. --B (talk) 01:39, 28 January 2008 (UTC)