User talk:Ravenmasterq

There is a LOT of disagreement about using flags or "Winner" on the 1/4 and 1/2 finals. This should be discussed thoroughly on the Talk page before we start making a bunch of changes. Please add your ideas and comments there. Thanks for your diligent work. --NThurston 21:19, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I see you tagged this article with a speedy tag. Poor writing style is not a criteria for speedy deletion. Please see the criteria for speedy deletion to see what are criteria. If you want, you should probably follow the instructions on WP:PROD or if that fails, WP:AFD in order to delete the page. 24.76.102.248 07:53, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a question

Are you wikistalking me? The two armour articles I could see finding in parallel, but "beater" kind of put me over the line. The list on my userpage has served as a wonderful honeypot in the past.

I'm not angry; I'll add to the articles when I get home. --Eyrian 21:00, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

list of baseball-related deletions

Noticed your vote earlier. There are other Afd debates there, where minor leaguers are nominated for deletion. --Truest blue 23:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I Don't Dance

Hi. In case you're not looking at it anymore, thought I'd let you know that I Don't Dance is on the Billboard Hot 100 now if that makes a difference to you concerning your Delete vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Don't Dance. Thanks Kinston eagle 12:04, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Omnitrix

Please don't engage in canvassing as you did by soliciting [1] TenPoundHammer there. Your comment was clearly a non-neutral wording that was borderline uncivil by calling people Fanboys. Consensus develops by involving any editor that wants to participate, not just those you believe will agree with you. FrozenPurpleCube 01:59, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't attack you, in either the notification or the note on the page. Yes, you did wrong, and I did specifically cite your actions, but that doesn't make it an attack. There are ways to express disapproval of an act without it being an attack. In fact, I made sure to balance my comment by advising both sides not to engage in the conduct. And it's pretty easy, I was going to leave a note on TenPoundHammer's talk page because I was troubled by a remark made at another AFD. FrozenPurpleCube 03:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

BTW, just in case you're curious I did check the talk pages of everybody who commented on the article just to see if there was any other canvassing going on. FrozenPurpleCube 03:22, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm sorry you feel attacked, but I tried to be as neutral as I could. What you did was something I highly disapprove of doing, so it's probably not going to feel like a pat on the head. It's hardly unknown to link to a diff of the inappropriate conduct when regards to a canvass. (I can note two cases of seeing it recently, one of a HP-related website and another involving Spells of Harry Potter.) In fact, I consider it very important to do so when the person being canvassed has commented on the subject. This lets everybody know about the problem, not just a few editors. FrozenPurpleCube 03:35, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you strike out your comment on TPH's page? I see another editor has taken it as an opportunity to canvass, and I'd rather not go through it again. FrozenPurpleCube 13:55, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the AFD page links to the diff, which you can't remove without editing the history, something I don't advise you to do. And as far as it goes, I have no strong opposition to Hammer, I think there might be a few concerns, but nothing I'd consider significant. I'm more concerned about hastiness than view. FrozenPurpleCube 15:42, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Striking it, btw, is different from deleting it, as that shows you recant the statement without removing it. That's generally the way one does things when you say something you retract. FrozenPurpleCube 15:43, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of December 20–21, 2006 Colorado Blizzard

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is December 20–21, 2006 Colorado Blizzard. 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 Wikipedia:Notability and "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(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/December 20–21, 2006 Colorado Blizzard. 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.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:14, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]