User talk:Angrymansr/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, Angrymansr, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  -- Infrogmation 00:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've nominated The Junkies Lingo, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that The Junkies Lingo satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Junkies Lingo and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of The Junkies Lingo during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -Chunky Rice 19:21, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...that myspace is not a credible source. lol. the juggreserection (talk) 14:46, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. i also believe cats are not food.

The article Cass Dillon has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki (talk) 17:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• The article as posted was only four sentences long - feel free to repost if you can show notability through reliable sources. NawlinWiki (talk) 18:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles meeting criteria for speedy deletion tend to be new articles. These articles get watched to ensure that wikipedia is not overrun with personal pages and self promotion or otherwise non-notable articles. Take care to note notability, especially in such new articles. RichMac (Talk) 18:25, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Being 'obviously notable' is a relative opinion. Again, wait to post a new page and note notability. (Random made-up figure) 50% of new pages are complete fluff, self-promotion, spam, etcetera. Patrolling involves churning through hundreds of new pages per hour and it can be tough to sort the good from the bad. Keep up the contributions and don't take it too personally. Admittedly I lean towards delete if things are iffy. RichMac (Talk) 02:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please understand our concerns. Please create your article with the aforementioned reliable verifiable sourcing when you submit the article. You can always create your own sandbox (i.e.: User:Angrymansr/Test article) and move or copypaste the material when it can stand on its own merits. Cheers and happy editing! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 18:48, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, common sense is not a factor around here. At least vandals get some fun out of wikipedia. Contributors only get grief. Angrymansr 19:05, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Angrymansr. You have new messages at Ioeth's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 21:45, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Angry, there is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Angrymansr which has moved to Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#User:Angrymansr. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 20:29, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We haven't talked before and so you don't know me. But I saw you were having some problems with a certain editor that I've had problems of my own with, and thought I'd drop by and leave you a word.

I know it's hard sometimes, but the thing you need to remember about wikipedia is to never, ever, lose your temper. First of all, it's just wikipedia, it doesn't matter that much. If it pisses you off too much, just go do something else for a couple days. Second, even if you're in the right, losing your temper always makes you look bad.

There's ways of dealing with tenditious editors besides flaming them and mocking them. You can let them accumulate offenses and then go to wikiquette. You can go to a larger area, like a project talk page, and call in some extra opinions there.

Happy editing, man. If you want to talk about this stuff, you can drop an edit on my talk page. McJeff (talk) 15:54, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Angrymansr! You should be careful about what you have been doing lately to this user. Nobody likes these bad comments, it hurts. What RobJ said in his edit today, he was trying to protect himself. I hate to say this for you, but you have been disrespecting this user very greatly. RobJ1981 has done a lot of great things during his time on Wikipedia. Please stop this attitude, or you may be blocked from an admin. Thank you. Versus22 (talk) 03:23, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And nobody likes aggressive editors who start edit wars, and instead of discussing things fling around accusations of vandalism, purposely violating policy, and post one warning after another on your talk page. And when asked to justify these "policy violations", he just ignores you. He's just as wrong as anyone else here, the thing is he starts the wars, and then runs to an admin when things don't go his way. Everything he is going through is in direct retaliation to his aggressive editing style. He is not innocent here. There must be a reason that this user has a very long history of conflict with other users. Angrymansr (talk) 11:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. I have the right to defend myself, from the 3 on 1 ganging up you, Jeff and Dan do on nearly every talk page I post on. RobJ1981 (talk) 06:07, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't even know who you were, and we wouldn't be here if it wasn't for your continual tenditiousness. Why don't you keep that in mind. Angrymansr (talk) 11:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please calm down. None of this is needed. Versus22 (talk) 13:42, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Angrymansr, don't act like you never did a thing wrong. Your poor behavior isn't justified at all. RobJ1981 (talk) 17:26, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rob, WTF? I never said I haven't done anything wrong. This is why people get frustrated with you. As a matter of fact I said I was guilty of losing my cool, and I also said "he's just as wrong as anyone else" (meaning there is more than 1 guilty party) only about 2 inches above where you posted. What have you admitted to? Nothing. Until you do so this issue can not be resolved. This could all be over if you just admit to your part. I'm not the one avoiding admitting their mistakes. So I am willing to extend the olive branch, but not without you doing your part. Angrymansr (talk) 19:39, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Allright please, can we all settle this and become friends? Everyone makes mistakes, nobody is perfect. Now, lets move on here, and have good spirits and good faith in others, all right? Versus22 (talk) 22:48, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 19:46, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Angrymansr, thought you might like to know that Rob went and rounded up his anti-roster-list buddies. There's a debate about the roster list going on here. McJeff (talk) 22:44, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A request for comments has been filed concerning the conduct of RobJ1981 (talk · contribs). You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/RobJ1981. -- McJeff (talk) 06:13, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I better reworded it.--~SRS~ 20:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Angrymansr, Regarding your proposing deletion of Journal of Physics D, please note the following, which is part of the official policy page at Wikipedia:Proposed deletion (see Wikipedia:Proposed deletion#Conflicts): "If anyone, including the article's creator, removes a {{prod}} tag from an article for any reason, do not put it back, except when the removal is clearly not an objection to deletion (such as blanking the entire article)." (Emphasis is in the original.) The policy does not acknowledge lack of improvement to the article as a valid reason for putting the proposal back in the article. The reason is that proposed deletion is only for uncontroversial deletion. If there is any controversy, proposed deletion is not usable; removal of the proposal is the usual sign of controversy. Since proposed deletion is no longer available for this article, the remaining method for deletion is to ask the community for a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, which you are free to do if you wish. I hope this clarifies deletion policies and procedures. Fg2 (talk) 02:32, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]