User talk:AdamBMorgan/2009

WP:FILMS Questionnaire

As a member of WikiProject Films, you are invited to take part in the project's first questionnaire. It is intended to gauge your participation and views on the project. At the conclusion of the questionnaire, the project's coordinators will use the gathered feedback to find new ways to improve the project and reach out to potential members. The results of the questionnaire will be published in next month's newsletter. If you know of any editors who have edited film articles in the past, please invite them to take part in the questionnaire. Please stop by and take a few minutes to answer the questions so that we can continue to improve our project. Happy editing!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:17, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

You maybe interested in the Article Rescue Squadron

Article Rescue Squadron

I notice that you are part of Category:Inclusionist_Wikipedians. I would like you to consider joining the Article Rescue Squadron. Rescue Squadron members are focused on rescuing articles for deletion, that might otherwise be lost forever. I think you will find our project matches your vision of Wikipedia.

Ikip (talk) 20:37, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

IP Blocked

I've given this user an IP Block Exemption, the range needs to stay blocked due to abuse. --Versageek 20:58, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

New story about That Guy With The Glasses and Channel Awesome

Sorry for having to post it here, but User:Megaman en m saw fit to delete the post as 'spam'. This site is really starting to get on my goddamn nerves. I don't just post any old story from some blog. These show up in my Google News results.

Blip.tv Brings Programs to YouTube, Ads to 'Channel Awesome' - Advertising Age, a reliable source that has been publishing since 1930. Please integrate this into the main article to either add credibility to citations or to further expand the article, much in the same way my Chicago Sun-Times and Chicago Tribune articles I found did.

Sometimes I feel like there are editors out there actively trying to remove references just to get an article deleted. It is petty.

Thank you for your continued help in expanding the TGWTG article! 75.64.247.79 (talk) 19:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

 Done AdamBMorgan (talk) 11:31, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks man, you're the greatest. I still don't know what the fuck was wrong with User:Megaman en m. He's giving me he silent treatment because he knows he royally screwed up. I'd edit the article, myself, but I may have a conflict of interest and may subconsciously not be neutral, so I'll just stick to posting news stories on the talk page so that neutral editors can decide whether or not there is valuable information that can expand or properly reference already-existing content in the article.

Every third-party reliable source helps further establish notability and verifiability, which makes it far less likely to be submitted for deletion again. That doesn't mean they won't try to get it deleted anyway. Administrators actually ganged up repeatedly to delete The Angry Video Game Nerd article for almost 18 full months straight, letting deletion discussions that were supposed to go for 7 days only last 30 minutes.

Even though That Guy With The Glasses has proven it is a worthy article, the system of admins are still quite corrupt here. Although they are no longer trying to delete the AVGN article, one admin with a seriously petty agenda by the name of "A Man In Black" has been continuously trying to remove all references to the Opie & Anthony Interview and other big references in the hopes that he can delete the article, claiming it has no references. He's been blocked (suspended) almost 15 times for these tactics, but he has friends in very, very high places that continue to allow him to break the rules to get his way. We have to stay on guard for people like this that are "above the law". I don't edit wikipedia much, but all editors of the page should check back at least once every three days to make sure some admin with an agenda isn't trying to destroy TGWTG because he doesn't like it.

Thank you for your awesome contributions! 75.64.247.79 (talk) 15:08, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

It's no problem adding references to the article. I think That Guy with the Glasses is sufficiently referenced now that it won't be nominated for deletion again. Vandalism happens but as it's not under attack at the moment it should be more or less safe for the time being. Feel free to mention any new references either here or on the TGWTG talk page. The TGWTG article is on my watchlist anyway, so I should notice any major changes (vadalism or new references) within a few days of them occurring. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 17:34, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Category:Web television

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Category:Web television. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Bradybd (talk) 03:41, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry so late in saying welcome!

I am really glad that you added the Article rescue squadron template to your user page.

Please take a minute to sign your name to our list of 270+ members:

• Wikipedia:ARSM#All_Members

And a warm welcome to the squadron!

Here to help articles tagged for rescue! Articles tagged for deletion and rescue Category Articles tagged for deletion and rescue not found Hi, AdamBMorgan, welcome to the Article Rescue Squadron! We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying and rescuing articles that have been tagged for deletion. Every day hundreds of articles are deleted, many rightfully so. But many concern notable subjects and are poorly written, ergo fixable and should not be deleted. We try to help these articles quickly improve and address the concerns of why they are proposed for deletion. This covers a lot of ground and your help is appreciated! If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you. And once again - Welcome! Ikip (talk) 21:03, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

your not required to sign, just nice to brag to everyone how strong we are :)

If there is anything I can do to help you out, please let me know. I have been here for 4 years now, so I know how things are supposed to work, and how wikipedia unfortunately really works :)Ikip (talk) 23:52, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

thanks for taking the time to sign in. Ikip (talk) 17:12, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		"The Rescue Barnstar is awarded to people who rescue articles from deletion." This barnstar is awarded to AdamBMorgan, for his hard work and dedication in saving articles. Keep up the wonderful work. Ikip (talk) 14:16, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

the effort you put into the article is what matters, not the end result. We have editors at WP:ARSH who were awarded this honor whose articles they were working on were not saved. Nice job, you deserve it. Ikip (talk) 13:37, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

The article you created was just deleted?

		The article you created was just deleted?
		All is not lost. Here is what you can do right now:
		Many administrators will be happy to give you a copy of your deleted article, either by putting it on a special user page for you (a process called userfication) or by e-mailing you a copy. List of administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles (empty) no pages or subcategories Once you have the article, you can try to resolve the issues why it was deleted. How to find the reason for deletion (not required to get your article undeleted) You can find out why your article was deleted: Special:Log/delete Enter the name of the article, then click "Go" On this log page, once you enter the name of your page, this will show you who deleted it and why. If the reason doesn't make sense, try clicking any links on the reason, or you can ask by typing {{help}} followed by your question on your talk page. Or you can ask any administrator to tell you why it was deleted. 1. If your article is deleted because of notability, it was deleted because you didn't give us enough information to confirm that people had published articles, books, or other publications to verify the claims your article made. You'll simply need to find some published articles that covered the subject of your article. While this may not be possible for some subjects (your cat, your garage band), you'd be surprised how easy it is, and people are happy to help on the help desk or in projects like the Article Rescue Squadron if you ask politely and tell them as much as you can. 2. If your article was deleted because it was a "copyvio", or copyright violation, an administrator removed it because it violated someone's copyright on their work. Only public domain information can be copied without permission — this does not include most web pages or images. You can rewrite the article so that it is no longer a copyright violation, you can request permission from the copyright holder to republish their work, or if and only if you are the copyright holder you can donate your work to the project or release it under a license compatible with Wikipedia's. If you've repaired the article, or you believe the reasons for deleting the article were in error, you can dispute the deletion at Deletion Review. Generally, you must show how the previous deletion(s) were in error, but this is the place to resolve disputes about whether a deletion was wrong.

Hope this helps. You made a valiant effort. You can also file a Wikipedia:Deletion review, more people support keep than delete, although Wikipedia:Deletion review are rarely successful. Ikip (talk) 02:13, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILM September Election Voting

The September 2009 project coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators from a pool of candidates to serve for the next six months; members can still nominate themselves if interested. Please vote here by September 28! This message has been sent as you are registered as an active member of the project. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:26, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of List of Bum Reviews with Chester A. Bum episodes

I have nominated List of Bum Reviews with Chester A. Bum episodes, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Bum Reviews with Chester A. Bum episodes. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Duffbeerforme (talk) 11:26, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of Nostalgia Chick episodes

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of Nostalgia Chick episodes. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Nostalgia Chick episodes. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:06, 20 December 2009 (UTC)