User talk:Melchiord

Welcome!

Hello, Melchiord, 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:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username 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! —αlεx•mullεr 00:23, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Delboy (musician)

A tag has been placed on Delboy (musician) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

Since you insist on removing the notability tags, I have been forced to nominate the article for speedy deletion. Removal of the db-bio tag by you, would be considered vandalism, so don't do that. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 02:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Delboy (musician)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Delboy (musician), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delboy (musician). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 02:32, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 02:40, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gregory Clegg for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. JCutter (talk) 06:39, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hugh Wilson

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Hugh Wilson. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Cunard (talk)

Why not start the article instead? If he's notable then that would stop all the back and forth. --AndrewHowse (talk) 17:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's obvious it would be deleted. Wikipedia is a farce.--Melchiord (talk) 19:39, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then the link on the dab page was pointless. That's why you got blocked. Nobody else is going to get blocked for removing that which shouldn't be there. You won't win this one. Take your lumps and then, if you like, come back afresh. --AndrewHowse (talk) 19:43, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule at Hugh Wilson. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. – Quadell ^(talk) 18:25, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Melchiord (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

3 users team up to only do 2 edits each. Boelyn made more than 3 edit revisions but using two logins. Why am I blocked but the others not? I am simply trying to get rid of confusion on the Hugh Wilson disambigiation page, so it doesn't leave off the #1 google search for that name. Quadell simply took sides. No neutrality. What a joke. oelyn http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Boleyn broke the 3 revert rule that resulted in my block. Check the history of Hugh Wilson disambiguation page and you will find 2 edits under Boelyn and one under Boelyn2 which is the same user. I request, that if I am blocked, she also be blocked for consistency and fairness.

Decline reason:

[1] [2] [3] [4]. That's 4 in 24 hours, and that's just the obvious ones - I'm not going to check precisely how many, it's still more than 3. Besides, this is about you and your block, not anyone else. Stwalkerster [ talk ] 20:23, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Boelyn http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Boleyn broke the 3 revert rule that resulted in my block. Check the history of Hugh Wilson disambiguation page and you will find 2 edits under Boelyn and one under Boelyn2 which is the same user. I request, that if I am blocked, she also be blocked for consistency and fairness.

The 3-revert says that a user should be blocked if he or she makes more than 3 reversions within a 24-hour period. Boleyn made only three. You made six. No edits teamed up to undo your change; rather, several edits all agreed that your edits violated our guideline, and independently reverted your change. – Quadell ^(talk) 19:48, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quadell the rules states 3 violations warrant a block. Doesn't state that only the person who edits the most get's blocked. If you are really neutral then block her too.

No, it doesn't say that 3 reversions warrant a block. Anyone who makes more than three reversions to a single article within a 24-hour period should be blocked. – Quadell ^(talk) 20:11, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically, WP:3RR says:

Users violating the rule may be blocked from editing for up to 24 hours for the first offense. [emphasis mine]

It is not necessarily inappropriate to block only one editor if there is an edit war going on. There are often many factors involved. Tim Pierce (talk) 20:32, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 20:07, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What page are you talking about? I haven't created any pages other than moving a Stargazing page over from Wikiversity.--Melchiord (talk) 20:10, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delboy (musician). ~~You did too create that page, and~~ you yanked the speedy tag from it at least once. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 20:24, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]