User talk:Gallura

~~Hi, You can sign your comments automatically using four tildes~~ I deleted your recent article because it did not provide independent verifiable sources that it meets the notability guidelines. It contained many unsourced spammy claims, and also lacked links to other wikipedia articles. This makes me suspect that it was just cut and pasted from a possibly copyright source, although I didn't check for that.

An obituary isn't really an objective source, particularly this one. A more balanced source is needed to establish the facts and importance.

Ascher created a revolution in industrial design — needs a reference
when he commissioned fine artists such as Henri Matisse, Henry Moore, Barbara Hepworth, Ivon Hitchens, Marie Laurencin, Sonia Delaunay, Cecil Beaton, Graham Sutherland and others, to design scarves for him. — fine is unnecessary, why haven't you linked to the articles on the people you have listed? For people this noteworthy, there must be a better reference for his work than the obit
The biographical part seems entirely unsourced, especially when you are throwing around phrases like He became a giant in his field... distinguished career...feted... a natural talent and much more hagiography.
The continued biography from In the mid 1940s... also lacks proper sources except for the Henry Moore bit.
In 1942 Zika launched a 'Try Your Hand' competition... Again we have a problem using an obituary; glowing comments from Sitwell, but nothing critical at all. Did everyone in the world like his work?
Henri Matisse and Henry Moore also designed a number... once again, nothing linked, no sources, purple prose like the list of designers who used Ascher textiles reads like a history of 20th Century fashion

I hope this helps you to produce a suitably encyclopaedic article, good luck, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:31, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not an excuse, I'm not doubting that he is notable, just that you have not produced references to support the claims made. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I have added links and piped links and further information. I feel it is coming along and looks much more professional - up to a point. Please advise. Thank you so much.

Proposed deletion of Elizabeth Wilhide

The article Elizabeth Wilhide has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 23:20, 14 June 2011 (UTC) Hi Andrew Taylor - thanks for the tips. I'm simply waiting for Elizabeth Wilhide to provide more details and facts. She got a first in PPE at Oxford and has written a large number of very successful books including most design books 'by' Terence Conran so I think we can rely on her facts (which I'll nonetheless double check and reference). If you could possibly give us a few hours before deleting this page, to complete all the work thoroughly on it, it would be tremendous. Thanks.[reply]

Nomination of Christopher John Hall for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Christopher John Hall is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher John Hall until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. —AssassiN's Creed^(talk) 07:41, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry on Christopher John Hall

I apologize for an over zealous user who is new to deleting articles. He should never have put a speedy deletion tag or and Article for Deletion (AfD) tag on Hall's article. Hall's article needed references, but instead of deletion, the user should have contacted you or put a note on the article to add references. Please, if you have any questions or need any help, do not hesitate to contact me. Bgwhite (talk) 05:16, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/LUMINOUS.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the reviewer's talk page

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 20:59, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rupert Edwards.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the reviewer's talk page

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! mabdul 13:27, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Gallura, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. Any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!

Disambiguation link notification for February 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Architectural lighting design (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mark Elliott

List of lighting designers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mark Elliott

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nobu Berkeley St, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Collins (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Amir Hosseinpour.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! hmssolent\^{Let's convene} _{My patrols} 01:17, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Interior design, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Collins (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:34, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sita Narasimhan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Presidency College (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jennifer Caron Hall may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

<ref name=serena{{cite web | title=Serena Morton Gallery| url=http://wwwserenamorton.com |

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:04, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiquette

Insults, even when posted anonymously, will get you nowhere. Nor will threats. Deb (talk) 17:57, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Deb. I am not anonymous. Neither am I trying to 'get anywhere'. I am appalled by your high-handed deletion of the page on Aimery Caron's research into African American history in the Virgin Islands. How dare you decide it's of no interest? As for threats - there are none. I have written to Jimmy Wales as I told you I would. To me, you are a pathetic person and you disgust me. Please stop polluting my inbox. Thanks ~~

Let us just clarify - at no time have I ever suggested that Aimery Caron or his work is "of no interest". You have created that impression yourself by being unable or unwilling to provide the references that wikipedia requires. Nor have I, at any time, placed anything in your "inbox". I have not e-mailed you, nor will I. Deb (talk) 10:48, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

These Wikinotes come into my inbox. I neither have time nor inclination to continue a conversation with you and would be very grateful if you would cease from posting on my talk page. The conversation is over. Thanks ~~

Christopher Kennedy (artist)

Hi, I'm a bit puzzled about this article as it is uncited and contains a list of "references" which do not immediately appear relevant, though perhaps there is a family connection; in addition, there is an IMDB link (not normally considered a reliable source) and two dead links. The notability and verifiability need to be established, especially since this is a BLP article. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He won an academy award... I will clear up dead links after dinner. And find a better source than IMDB ( are you sure its not used for reference?) Apologies. ~~

Ok, that should mean one good ref then; he'll need at least 3. Yes, I'm sure. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:53, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are definitely more than three references which I can use. It may take me a day or so to find them so I rely on your patience. Also I have asked several people in the film industry, and it seems that there is No Other reputable log of film cast and crews online, other than IMDB. Many Wikipedia pages reference IMDB. A very well established precedent.

Disambiguation link notification for February 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Christopher Kennedy (artist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Luminism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Porto Rafael, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Theatre (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adrian Green, curator

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Adrian Green, curator, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Adrian Green (archaeologist). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:04, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:26, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Rupert Edwards concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Rupert Edwards, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:33, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jennifer Caron Hall, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bernard Rose. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sydenham Arts Festival, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages The Lady Vanishes and East Belfast. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:11, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sydenham Arts

The article Sydenham Arts has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Arts organization with no claim of notability. The article notes that some famous artists live in the region of Sydenham, but that doesn't make Sydenham Arts notable.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. IagoQnsi (talk) 18:52, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sydenham Arts for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sydenham Arts is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sydenham Arts until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. IagoQnsi (talk) 15:02, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see you made some comments at Talk:Sydenham Arts but they really need to be at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sydenham Arts to be considered in the discussion.

I think the article may be trying to cover several different topics - the organisation itself, the festival(s) and the arts in Sydenham generally - and falling between stools. The organisation has yet to file any accounts as a charity. As a limited company, its assets were less than £10k in the last accounts filed. It doesn't appear notable in Wikipedia terms at present but may become so when it opens its centre. For the other topics you may do better adding content to the main Sydenham article. Regards, --Cavrdg (talk) 16:43, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sydenham Arts, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages The Lady Vanishes and Sandy Powell. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:30, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Lucinda Rogers

The article Lucinda Rogers has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Karl 334 ^Talk-^-Contribs 18:43, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Karl. We are ALWAYS offended. We have better things to do - for instance earn a living or look after refugees. All you guys ever want to do is destroy and delete. Aren't you ashamed?

Speedy deletion nomination of Sydenham Arts

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Sydenham Arts, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. IagoQnsi (talk) 16:09, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited James Macdonald (director), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page A Delicate Balance. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:44, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Gebler Tooth for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gebler Tooth is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gebler Tooth until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sionk (talk) 19:04, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Gallura. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016

Hello, I'm CAPTAIN RAJU. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Zika Ascher without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(✉) 12:55, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Zika Ascher. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(✉) 12:57, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retracting content

Hello. Regarding your blanking of content with the comment that "this article has been removed by its creator, who no longer gives wikipedia permission to publish it", I'm afraid it is not possible to retract content in this way. As it says at the bottom of the edit interface in Wikipedia every time you make an edit, "By saving changes, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL."

If there are copyright issues at play here - if the content had already been published elsewhere or written by someone else and you were legally unable to release the text under a CC licence - then we can sort something out, but a simple retraction for personal reasons goes against the fundamental processes of Wikipedia. The article has been worked on by many other editors since you created it in 2010, and it is no longer a single person's work.

Let me know if you have any questions, or want to talk about why you want to remove this content. --McGeddon (talk) 13:29, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear you had some bad experiences with other editors. Your contributions are still appreciated. --McGeddon (talk) 13:46, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 2016

Hello, I'm McGeddon. An edit that you recently made to James Macdonald (director) seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Nominating an article for deletion is a specific three-stage process, as outlined at WP:AFDLIST. I've removed the AfD templates you added to the tops of a couple of articles today, as these templates have no effect by themselves (and, significantly, say nothing about why you think those articles should be deleted). McGeddon (talk) 17:21, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Gebler Tooth

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Gebler Tooth, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. SorryNotSorry ✽ ✉ 14:18, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sasha Gebler for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sasha Gebler is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sasha Gebler until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sionk (talk) 20:00, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gallura. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.Deb (talk) 12:47, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Rupert Edwards

Hello, Gallura. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Rupert Edwards".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. 1989 (talk) 00:58, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

You appear to have a close connection to the subject on Wikipedia that raises concerns about a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. Anyone with a conflict of interest must avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing articles related to you, your family or colleagues, your organization or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);
and you must always:
avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest. Thank you.

Deb (talk) 16:11, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gallura, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community. Deb (talk) 12:26, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gallura. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Bbb23 (talk) 15:13, 29 March 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here - Dear Bbb23, I am a journalist, published in newspapers of record such as The Telegraph and The Evening Standard, The Spectator, The Week, a well as many magazines. I have written many wikipedia pages which are both well researched and well written. Earlier this year I tried to evade a particular editor who seemed to want to delete everything I wrote. I did not realise it was so much against the rules of Wikipedia to take on a new identity every time you write a new page. I did that to evade this particular editor. Which I realise is against the rules. With my new identities I created some very good new pages which have been retained on Wikipedia. Three quarters of the pages I created on Wikipedia have NOT been deleted - therefore my work can't be as bad as all that, right? Some of my pages - though not all - can be seen listed on my XTools page. You can see articles I created for instance, on Hans Rehfisch, on Country Herb Committee, on Galerie Zak, on Tom Keogh and so on. It has never been my intention to disrupt Wikipedia. Quite the contrary. In my view, the editor who was trying to stop me contributing was disrupting Wikipedia. I have also contributed money to the Wikipedia project. I was invited to join the Teahouse through AfC. I am not a vandal, I am responsible. I received a note recently saying I would be unblocked in 2018, which is why I came back to Wikipedia today to look. I find it's not true. Could you reconsider please. Thank youGallura (talk) 18:19, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

After this time, the socking issue would be something that could be considered in the past, and we could good-faith that you were't aware of WP:SOCK at the time. However the rest of your request indicates to me that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how Wikipedia works; it doesn't matter how 'responsible' you are or how many pages have been "retained" - which is, itself, a pointless stat that demonstrates nothing - if you violate policy, knowing or not, and the implication that "I donated money to Wikipedia, I should be unblocked" is especially troubling. At the very least you need to acknowledge that you understand WP:COI and will abide by it - which is, I suspect, what the editor "who wants to delete everything you wrote" was actually cleaning up after you about - before unblocking can be considered here. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:44, 20 November 2017 (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.

Dear The Bushranger, what an unpleasant tone of writing you have. Is this entirely necessery or do you simply like to unleash venom at random? I have donated £20 to Wikipedia- which I do think proves I had good intensions towards it - especially as I get begging letters from you at regular intervals. I have looked at your WP:COI regulations as requested and find them ridiculous. In the history of writing, the people who know something about a subject or are close to it have always been valued most highly to write on that subject. You're the only place where ignorance is more highly valued than knowledge. You mirror Trump's America perfectly. So I take back my request, and would not write for you if I was paid milions to do it. ThanksGallura (talk) 01:02, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]