User talk:RTFA

Welcome!

Hello, RTFA, 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! --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:04, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello[edit]

Just a friendly note: when you remove text from a talk page to archive it, please state "archiving" in the edit summary. People like me who patrol Special:Recentchanges get a little scared when we see someone remove 25,000 bytes from a Wikipedia talk page. :) Shalom (Hello • Peace) 20:54, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That page[edit]

I protected, but quickly unprotected the page as I'm about to go off-line. And I feel I should be around if I go protecting it. I'd encourage discussion prior to reversion. Much time of lots of people has been spent on that page and related issues. -- Flyguy649 ^talk 00:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey[edit]

Hope you didn't feel like I was attacking you there, I can understand the situation with regards to the subject.. and as I said, the information that you provided is what DRV should be about. Anyway, have a good one. SirFozzie (talk) 15:46, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Don Murphy[edit]

An editor has nominated Don Murphy, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. 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 "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 by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don Murphy (3rd nomination) and 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. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 02:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributions[edit]

Hi. After reviewing your contributions, I notice that you only make edits relating to Don Murphy. While there is not something wrong with that specifically, I'm concerned that your edits may advocate for, or not be within, a Neutral Point of View, which is required when editing Wikipedia. Please review WP:SPA and note that your editing is cause of concern. Also, this edit of yours has been reverted due to concerns relating to Biographies of Living People. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:54, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You DO NOT revert to a version that you think may violate BLP then challenge others to remove the violating stuff. If anyone has suggested any of the material violates BLP then none of it is reinserted until there is a talk page consensus that it is OK to do so, particularly on a controversial topic. Your edit summary "Restored revision from before the DRV; feel free to modify per WP:BLP" is simply not an acceptable position. If you think people might challenge some of the material under the BLP, then discuss it with them first on the talk page. We don't put disputed material into biographies.--Doc^g 17:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining, though you did not need to use caps. I do not believe that there is a problem with my revision because everything in my revision is fully sourced. I attempted to balance information about the producer's reputation with two quotes from the producer himself. Seeing that you are part of the BLP watch, can you point out what you think can be disputed? Everything is verifiable information from reliable sources. RTFA (talk) 17:08, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whether the material is, in your opinion, sourced and neutral isn't the point. The question is, do others agree? You are apparently aware that some are disputing some of it, and indeed have removed it under BLP. Personally, I've not looked at the content and don't intend to. Please discuss it with those who removed the material in the first place. Until you've reached a consensus with them, the material should stay out. As I say, use the talk page.--Doc^g 17:12, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Topic Ban[edit]

I have proposed banning you from the Don Murphy article. You may wish to comment here. Nothing personal.--Doc^g 22:37, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would understand being banned from editing Don Murphy based on the AN/I, but why can't I edit the article's talk page or other editors' talk pages? RTFA (talk) 23:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind; I see your explanation now. Can SqueakBox and JoshuaZ be informed of this? I was in discussion with them about the article, but I can't partake any longer. RTFA (talk) 00:01, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware of this, feel free to drop me an email. Thanks, SqueakBox 00:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Unfortunately, the circumstances around this article make it more trouble than it's worth right now. Probably should have skipped the second introduction and gone straight to the talk page, huh? Teaches me not to be overly contributive. RTFA (talk) 00:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well we all need to be learning all the time as wikipedia editors, as in life, IMHO. I hope you continue contributing to the project as a whole. Thanks, SqueakBox 00:12, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wish you no ill-will. My guess is that you are a really good wikipedia contributor who got obsessed with this article for some reason. Please go back to whatever you were doing before and leave this to other editors. SPAs should simply not be editing BLPs.--Doc^g 00:14, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me for trying to protect my identity, then. I'm admittedly bitter, so I hope you sleep badly tonight. :) RTFA (talk) 00:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chill out, mate, though those badly slept nights can be the most precious. If you have personal info in your real account history I strongly urge you to delete that account's history, as I myself recently got my own user history deleted[1]. Thanks, SqueakBox 00:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Topic ban/blocked[edit]

Per the consensus on ANI for a topic ban on Don Murphy, you are requested to move to a different topic altogether. Since this account has only been used to edit wrt that one topic, you will not be needing it, and I have blocked it, but not your IP. Please log in to your main account and move on. Your intentions may be good, the effect is not.--Doc^g 00:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. RTFA (talk) 00:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked. Complete lack of consensus for that block. Viridae ^Talk 00:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you are going to return, RTFA, please seek consensus on the talk page for any additions you would like to add to the article. Thanks, SqueakBox 18:42, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]