User talk:Roaster101

Welcome!

Hello, Roaster101, 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 on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

hello —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.254.180.101 (talk) 21:19, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Smile![edit]

Hello Roaster101, Charleythegodfather has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Notability of Charles gregory watson[edit]

The article Charles gregory watson has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. --Fuhghettaboutit 23:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Montecito Resort and Casino[edit]

The page has been previously deleted as not notable enough to have it's own page. It is to remain as such and redirect back to Las Vegas (TV series).CelticGreen 23:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do not address people on their user page, use their discussion page. While you may "feel" the Montecito should have it's own page, it has been previously decided long ago that it should not and should redirect back to the Las Vegas (TV series) page. Please honor consensus decisions made before you became an editor. CelticGreen 23:09, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.Geni 23:14, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Montecito Proposal v. CelticGreen[edit]

Initiated by Roaster101 at 4:41, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Involved parties[edit]

Roaster101 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
CelticGreen (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Statement by {Roaster101}[edit]

Several days ago, I worked to create an article on the Montecito Resort & Casino, a fictional program featured in the television program Las Vegas. I believed it was appropiate since Wikipedia has articles on other fictional locations such as Wisteria Lane from Desperate Housewives and Fox River State Penitentiary from Prison Break. However, just moments after the creation of the article, it was quickly deleted by CelticGreen. HER explanation is as follows: "The page has been previously deleted as not notable enough to have it's own page. It is to remain as such and redirect back to Las Vegas (TV series).CelticGreen 23:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC)." I was not aware that the page "was not notable enough to have it's own page," and I would have appreciated receiving a warning before the article was deleted. I had just become a member to Wikipedia several hours prior, and when I tried to communicate with CelticGreen and explain that I felt that the Montecito should have it's own article, I made the mistake of commenting on his user page since I knew no other method of contact. I received this response: "Do not address people on their user page, use their discussion page. While you may "feel" the Montecito should have it's own page, it has been previously decided long ago that it should not and should redirect back to the Las Vegas (TV series) page. Please honor consensus decisions made before you became an editor. CelticGreen 23:09, 16 October 2007 (UTC)." Once again, I felt that this response was unnecessarily rude. I am concerned with the creation of an article on the Montecito, but even more concerned with how I was treated.

Statement by {Apparently that's me CelticGreen}[edit]

You weren't treated "badly" your edits were fixed per Wikipedia guidelines. I was not rude, I was factual. Being "new" does not excuse you from doing wrong or being corrected. A child learning to drive a car isn't allowed to make mistakes, they are corrected per motor vehicle rules. Wikipedia has rules, guidelines, and a Manual of Style. I corrected your edits per the MOS and prior consensus. When you create a page over a "this page was previously deleted" you have violated policy. I did not delete your page (which, by the way, no one owns pages on Wikipedia), I redirected it to the correct article.

We've all been new at one time or another but most of us accept that we might do wrong regardless of intention. You were not treated improperly. And, FYI, once again, you are doing this "you verses me" thing in the wrong place. Your user page is not for this behaviour, your talk page is for something like this although this is the first I've ever seen this behaviour.

Furthermore, you do not go against another editor in this manner, this is a violation of the civility policy. Your behaviour constitutes incivility calling out another editor and using a confrontational approach. Please do not do this again. CelticGreen 03:14, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]