Revision as of 01:16, 15 June 2013 editThe Writer 2.0 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers10,750 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 18:55, 13 November 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,307,006 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:The Writer 2.0/Archive 2) (bot | ||
(72 intermediate revisions by 16 users not shown) | |||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
{{Archive box|search=yes|]<br/>}} | {{Archive box|search=yes|]<br/>}} | ||
== 20:20:38, 29 July 2016 review of submission by 72.67.56.38 == | |||
== Submission == | |||
{{Lafc|username=72.67.56.38|ts=20:20:38, 29 July 2016|declined=Draft:My_Fighting_Season}} | |||
I have a article for review. Just to check to see it's good. http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Aaron_Hester ] (]) 03:34, 6 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
:Not much I can really do with this one given the notability concerns by previous editors. Perhaps you should slow down a bit with the UDFA bios? I know it's tempting but half of these guys will likely not make it out of training camp let alone be on an NFL roster by midseason. Technically speaking, these guys shouldn't even have a bio until they meet or have had a collegiate career. Hester, no offense to him, seems to have been middle of the pack, at best. -- ] <sup>]</sup> 12:22, 6 May 2013 (UTC) | |||
== My bias? == | |||
My "Bias" is "disturbing"??? No, what is disturbing (and downright creepy) is your slavish loyalty to a guy that openly despises honest, hard working fans. Everything I posted about Scott were facts backed up with citations, and you've tried (and mostly failed) to protect this guy from those facts. And if you think it's bad now, what are you going to do in 2-3 years if he ends up like Joey Porter, whos so broke he's getting thrown into jail for cutting bad checks to casinos and getting his mansion foreclosed on? does the thought of that make you tear up? | |||
Hello, | |||
Anyways, I've made my point and exposed Scott for the paycheck stealing, pampered thug wannabe fraud that he is. Despite your best efforts, I would say about 80 percent of my edits have stayed. I'll be monitoring to make sure my current edits stay on the page, but as long as they are left alone I have no intention of additional posts on scott's page. | |||
I'm requesting help in the reasons why my article is being rejected. The last message was there were not enough references. I added references and was rejected again. Is there now something I should delete such as the official website? I have used other television shows and films as a template/reference and they had the same type of articles and websites. | |||
There are many Jets and Jets alumni that are worth defending - If i was posting embarrassing facts about Joe Namath or Curtis Martin, I could maybe understand your seething rage - but Bart Scott is not one of them. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 02:52, 10 June 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
Please advise. | |||
Oh and for the record - there is no "sock puppet" stuff going on. a.) there are 6 billion people in the world, and i highly doubt im the only person that knows about Scott making a fool of himself all of last year and b.) if you look at my user history, you will notice ive never had a problem using my IP address to post whatever facts i feel like posting. | |||
Sincerely, | |||
Jo Haskin | |||
{{-}} | |||
How did i "lie" to you about my user history?? I said I never had a problem using my ip address to post facts (even if it means i get banned for a few hours like a political prisoner!!), and thats proven in my user history. And I remember that other freedom hating editor who censored me very well and i make no apologies for exposing him for for what he was. My banning was the same as someone in a third world country being thrown in jail for standing up for freedom, and i am proud of it!! I stand by that edit, and thank you for referring to it as a "gem" ;). | |||
{{-}} | |||
== Good article reassessment for ] == | |||
As for your accusation (which you couldnt even accuse me of outright, you went around me to the wiki editors like a Bolshevik going to the NKVD to rat on someone that was being counter revolutionary), I neither know, nor care who this other person was, and have not looked at the edits and dont care what this person said. I'm not responsible for and will not be persecuted for other peoples actions. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 00:34, 14 June 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 00:09, 13 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Please continue to lie. Your rants amuse me. -- ] <sup>]</sup> 00:39, 14 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
No problem. I'll continue to tell the truth. Your similarity to a cross between Patton Oswalt on Big Fan and a soviet politburo member amuses me. :) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 21:23, 14 June 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:Good. While you do that, I'll continue to ignore any and all ignorant statements you make henceforth. -- ] <sup>]</sup> 01:16, 15 June 2013 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 18:55, 13 November 2024
This is The Writer 2.0's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
20:20:38, 29 July 2016 review of submission by 72.67.56.38
- 72.67.56.38 (talk · contribs)
Hello,
I'm requesting help in the reasons why my article is being rejected. The last message was there were not enough references. I added references and was rejected again. Is there now something I should delete such as the official website? I have used other television shows and films as a template/reference and they had the same type of articles and websites.
Please advise.
Sincerely, Jo Haskin
Good article reassessment for New York Jets
New York Jets has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 00:09, 13 November 2024 (UTC)