User talk:Mikemiddleton

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] AfD nomination of Shadowclan

The Shadowclan article conforms to all four policies required for a valid Wikipedia article: (Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, and Wikipedia:No original research) and the copyright policy (Wikipedia:Copyrights). I urge you to (re)read the debate and administrative decision of the last two afd discussions before attempting another one. If you still believe that the article should be nominated for a third afd tag based on the same "not-notable" argument, please follow the proper procedures (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion) for nominating an article for deletion. Note that abuse of the deletion process, vandalism, sockpuppetry and meatpuppetry are not tolerated. Yuut 03:59, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Yuut your a sockpuppet for Shadowclan, thanks and good bye. Mikemiddleton 15:52, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Blake Van Leer

An editor has nominated Blake Van Leer, 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/Blake Van Leer (2nd 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. 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. Jayden54Bot 21:22, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Blake Van Leer was assessed by the community and considered to be non-notable. Therefore please stop adding a link to that page in Van Leer. Disambiguation pages for names are not indiscriminate lists of people, they are tools to navigate to articles that we have on notable people. The fact that you are close to getting a block for violating WP:3RR notwithstanding, please consider this a warning to stop recreating deleted material. Thank you. Rockpocket 22:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

This is your final warning. If you continue to replace links to deleted material you will be blocked from editing (and reverting from your IP address will not work either). Please let this one go. Thank you. Rockpocket 18:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Editing from an IP will not avoid a block, as a WP:CHECK can easily confirm that the same person made both edits. Now you know that, be aware that any more such disruptive edits from any account or IP will result in all your accounts being blocked. This action will occur without any further warnings, so please consider very carefully whether you wish to continue along these lines. Rockpocket 21:08, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24hrs in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for disruptive editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by replying here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} .

Rockpocket 23:45, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Mike. On your return from a block, your very first edit was to repeat the action which earned you the block int he first place. Clearly the 24hrs away from editing did not help you gain perspective and thus you have earned yourself a longer block. Let me be clear with you. When this block expires you are welcome to return, but if you make any more Blake Van Leer associated additions, either from this or any of your sockpuppet accounts, all of them will be blocked indefinately without further warning. This is your chance, either contribute constructively or not at all. Also, please do not abuse edit summaries by marking wholesale deletions as "minor". Thanks. Rockpocket 18:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC)