Jump to content

User talk:John F. Lewis

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MafiaMobDoll (talk | contribs) at 00:29, 5 February 2013 (My Page). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)

Wizard101

The deletion of the characters section was due to it being unnecessary and more detailed than what is needed. I posted on the talk page for Wizard101 stating my intentions, as well as that I would carry them out if nobody was opposed. Since nobody replied to my comment, I assumed that it was OK, especially since the Wizard101 page has a flag for having minutiae. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rakomwolvesbane (talkcontribs) 23:15, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Saying 'If no one opposes' is not consensus that stands. A discussion has to take place for consensus to be reached. In addition Wikipedia articles are supposed to be detailed and informative. Unless what you deleted was about lets say Minecraft on that article: It is necessary. Plus removal of which with no proper consensus is usually considered vandalism. John F. Lewis (talk) 23:19, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I see. I'll wait for responses/discussion, but what if nobody responds within, say, two weeks? Is there a point at which I can take the lack of response to be affirmation, or should I just keep waiting indefinitely? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rakomwolvesbane (talkcontribs) 00:51, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately with consensus, if it doesn't come naturally you would have to force it by posting at the appropriate WikiProject or contacting editors to put their view in. John F. Lewis (talk) 00:57, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm OK. Thanks for your help. Rakomwolvesbane (talk) 01:10, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My Page

John why did you ask my page to be deleted? I worked very hard on this bio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MafiaMobDoll (talkcontribs) 00:40, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't. I moved your page back to where it is appropriate and nominated the redirect I created. John F. Lewis (talk) 00:43, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

John why did you as for my page regarding Wendy Hanley-Mazaors to be deleted? I have worked very hard on this bio, along with help from Wikipedia. So Please tell me why you would do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MafiaMobDoll (talkcontribs) 00:44, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Again: I did not ask for deletion. I am requesting deletion of a redirect I created. I moved your article back to your user space. John F. Lewis (talk) 00:47, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

John I'm asking why you moved my page back to user, when I'm trying to move the page to main stream Wikipedia? Please help me try to understand why you did this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MafiaMobDoll (talkcontribs) 23:05, 4 February 2013 (UTC) Please tell me why you re-directed my page? I need an explanation for Wikipedia? Please answer my question? I have contacted Wikipedia and they informed me, they did NOT delete or re-direct my page. So why would you take the time and re-diorect my page, when this bio is truthful, and backed up with hundreds of media information, books, and television. Carl Mazaros 23:32, 4 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MafiaMobDoll (talkcontribs) [reply]

User:MafiaMobDoll, I'm looking at User:MafiaMobDoll/Wendy Mazaros, and I see an advertisement, not at all written in the neutral tone of an encyclopedia article. In fact, it is so promotional in tone that I wonder if you are Ms. Mazaros herself, or a close associate of hers. Before it's ready for encyclopedia space, it'll need to be rewritten in a neutral way. If you are a person with a conflict of interest in this subject, it would be better if you didn't write about it, but focused your attention on articles you can improve on subjects that you aren't directly connected with. Don't worry- if this is truly a notable person, it's inevitable that she'll be written about by a person who is unconnected to her. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:41, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FisherQueen this article was based on fact, and references. How would you suggest it be written in a neutral content. How it was written was mostly by quotes from newspaper articles, media reports, and her book that spans over 35 years. Sorry I must disagree with you... She did not write the article and that is all that matters. Please read again, almost every sentence has a reference... This is neutral and true... I could have added 100 more references to make even more neutral. I like the way I wrote it, short, sweet and to the point. It tells a story of a runaway child who ends up in a Circle of Terror! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MafiaMobDoll (talkcontribs) 00:09, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality is not based on references. Neutrality is based on the point of view. These are just some of the things that are not neutral about it: "tender age", "fell into the arms", "Binion threw Wendy", the use of bold/big in "Corporate Promoter for the Dragna Crime Family and LA Crime Family", "and enjoys a wide circle of family and friends", "harrowing life story", "vivid portrait". Also, you say that you used "quotes from...". If you copied the whole article from other sources, then it's a copyright violation and will be deleted soon. gwickwiretalkedits 00:14, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FisherQueen thank you for the add on in regards to the first sentence, after reading it, I kinda see what you mean. actually there is not that much about Wendy it is all about who was in her life. The article should just be about Wendy? Should I leave out her husbands, family and or anything contected to her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MafiaMobDoll (talkcontribs) 00:24, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

qwickwire, yes I used references and quotes, but they are attached as references, through news media outlets, and wikipedia. I did NOT write the quotes, did not need too, they are in the references. Since when was it against the wiki rules to bold certain names and things? Makes the story stand out.

Questions from last night

Turns out I fell asleep but I spotted the questions and things you said last night so...

  • "I made a quick pull to correct a word in a comment... Most pointless pull ever though :)" My spelling can sometimes be terrible in comments, i type them so quickly and generally dont read them.
  • "It removes the {{stub}} tag: Considered adding the {{stub}} tag?" currently the $tag's in the config are only tags to add to the multiple issues template. as there are literally hundreds or thousands of stub tags we decide not to set them in the config as we can match them all with a regex :) and if we ever get around to adding them we can just use {{stub}} rather than one of the stub types.
  • "are there any tags Addbot does not apply that you wish it would/could?" yes all of them.

·Add§hore· Talk To Me! 07:04, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, though you have waited til I got onto IRC in an hour. Though again thanks. John F. Lewis (talk) 13:04, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article

Johmn why did you move my page back to user, I'm trying to move my page to the main stream Wikipedia. Can you help me try to understand why it was moved back by you to user and not to Wikipedia? Thanks Carl Mazaros 23:03, 4 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MafiaMobDoll (talkcontribs)

You moved it to the Wikipedia Namespace when it should have been in the article namespace. That pretty much governs my move. John F. Lewis (talk) 23:14, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

John we are not playing chess, just asked a simple question as to why? If you would have stated in the first place I moved my article to the wrong format, it would have saved us alot of misunderstanding. So what you are telling me is to move my page to article namespace, can I ask why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MafiaMobDoll (talkcontribs) 23:37, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It belongs in the main space purely because that is how the encyclopaedia is organised. The Wikipedia namespace is reserved for contributions to project policy or organised discussion among users. John F. Lewis (talk) 23:40, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Bounce With Me (B.G. Song)

Hello John F. Lewis. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Bounce With Me (B.G. Song), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to records. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 06:02, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for informing me Malik Shabazz. John F. Lewis (talk) 12:11, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]