User talk:Danielle Lloyd
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Warnings
Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content (as you did on Danielle Lloyd). Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! robwingfield «T•C» 11:19, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to Danielle Lloyd, you will be blocked. robwingfield «T•C» 12:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Blanking
Might I ask a) why you don't want an article on you, and b) if you have any proof that you actually are Danielle Lloyd? DS 16:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- Was any proof provided? I understand that this account has been inactive since 16th May, where it was used for editing for no longer than 2 minutes, but if this account is owned by anyone other than Danielle Lloyd, perhaps it should be blocked, as per WP:U? Dreaded Walrus 09:44, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Take a look at this: Talk:Shilpa_Shetty#Shilpa_Shetty, where this user appears to be commenting on her conduct (assuming she is Danielle Lloyd). In the interests of assuming good faith, it's pretty harsh to ban someone, maybe they just need a tutorial in Wikipedia. But obviously if this behaviour goes on despite warnings then action can be taken. Ekantik talk 03:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- What I mean is in accordance with WP:USER, one type of username that is inappropriate is "Usernames of well-known living or recently deceased people, such as Chuck Norris or Ken Lay, unless you are that living person. If you are, please note this on your user page. These accounts may be temporarily blocked pending confirmation, if in an administrator's best judgment or per community consensus at WP:ANI discussion, there may be doubt over the validity of the claim. (See also Wikipedians with articles)."
- As far as I am aware, this user has made no attempt to prove that they actually are Danielle Lloyd, bar, of course, the claim of non-racism, and the almost fully blanking of an article, using an aggressive edit summary.
- I wasn't calling for this user to be banned outright, just for some proof to be provided that this user actually is who they say they are, as per guidelines. There is nothing wrong with using a famous person's real name, as long as you can prove that you are that person, as with Richard Dawkins, who has edited Wikipedia using User:RichardDawkins. --Dreaded Walrus 03:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Take a look at this: Talk:Shilpa_Shetty#Shilpa_Shetty, where this user appears to be commenting on her conduct (assuming she is Danielle Lloyd). In the interests of assuming good faith, it's pretty harsh to ban someone, maybe they just need a tutorial in Wikipedia. But obviously if this behaviour goes on despite warnings then action can be taken. Ekantik talk 03:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
