User talk:Indie-lauper

May 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Brianna Tatiana, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. gordonrox24 (talk) 16:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brianna Tatiana

I have opened a discussion about your edits to Brianna Tatiana and in particular, your apparent legal threat, which I advise you to withdraw asap, at the administrators' noticeboard. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:52, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Legal threat has been rescinded. It wasn't a legitimate threat, just to scare off whoever made this article because it is fake and the actual person whose pictures "Brianna Tatiana" is using would like this page taken down as soon as possible. Indie-lauper (talk) 23:07, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any sign photos were on the page. What revisions of the page / photos here are you referring to? I've looked at 25 older revisions of the article and can't find them.

Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 23:20, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

George, I think he's referring to a wider problem than just Wikipedia. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:25, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

George, definitely a wider problem than just Wikipedia. There are no pictures on the article page, you're right. There are other pages I'm trying to get deleted that use pictures so I'm sorry for the confusion. Indie-lauper (talk) 23:29, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. If there were fraudulently used photos here we'd need to know about it, but if they're not in use here but elsewhere then that's not something we need to worry about. Good luck with those other sites. Thanks for the clarification. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 23:37, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009

You have been indefinitely blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for making legal threats or taking legal action. You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia as long as the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved. If you believe that a legal action is warranted, you may contact our information team at info-en@wikimedia.org and they may forward it to our legal counsel or a more appropriate venue. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

--Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:56, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate that you have concerns about this page. I am not fully sure what they are but in any case, it seems to me that the subject of the article, real or not, does not meet our guidelines for inclusion in the encyclopedia and thus it was proposed for deletion two days ago. It will take about five more days for this to happen. Is that OK?

I will unblock you on the basis that you have rescinded the legal threat. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:20, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you should be unblocked now. If you want to discuss this further, drop me a line on my talk page.--Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate that greatly. I won't make any more revisions to the page, and I'm sorry for the pestering. Just wanted to get this handled quickly. Again, appreciate your help. Indie-lauper (talk) 23:27, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll keep an eye on the page myself and see that it gets deleted in due course. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:37, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note to say that, annoyingly, a 'drive-by' IP removed my proposed deletion tag (it has to go unchallenged for seven days) so I've now put the article up for deletion discussion. What will happen is that there will be a discussion as to whether the subject meet the guidelines for inclusion in the encyclopedia and at the end of seven days, an administrator will judge the consensus and take the appropriate action. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:00, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is gone. The consensus that it should be deleted was such that we didn't hang around for seven days. Best wishes. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 17:56, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]