Tumble-Weed

LEAVE MY PAGE ALONE.

Grand Master Tumble-Weed May Have Been Here, But He Is Not Too Sure About It.

I know it's your userpage and all...

but please stop adding nonsense templates. Some of them add this page to catigories that are in use. Take a look at this welcome message and read over what we do here! In the mean time would you clear out all these templates and start over? If you don't I'm sure someone will anyway so why don't you do it first...Thanks!

Well! I guess you don't want the welcome. I think you should read this: WP:TPG...it's the userpage guidlines. But for the most part keep the problem templates off and you'll be fine. But just to make it clear, we're here to write an encyclopedia and you may find that people won't have a lot of patience with you if you just make trouble and don't contribute...so have fun and be sure and keep in mind why we're here. thanks...Rx StrangeLove 23:38, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Templates

I have removed the templates from your user and talk page, as they add your pages to categories where they don't belong, such as Category:Articles lacking sources. If you want to experiment with templates, please subst them ({{subst:unreferenced}}, not {{unreferenced}}), then edit the page again and remove the categories (the bits that look like [[Category:Whatever]]). Ask me if you have any questions. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 23:01, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

PRECISELY. . .

Don't misrepresent other people: As a rule, refrain from editing others' comments without their permission. Though it may appear helpful to correct typing errors, grammar, etc, please do not go out of your way to bring talk pages to publishing standards, since it is not terribly productive and will tend to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Certainly don't edit someone's words to change their meaning. Editing or deleting your own words is up to you. Also avoid putting others' comments in the wrong context. (See MeatBall:ContextSwizzling).

Edit summary

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thanks, and happy editing.

Skinnyweed 14:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Umm, what summary did I forget to put a summary on? Tumble-Weed (Not really sure how to hyperlink this to my talk page, but would appreciate a reply)

Well it was for these two: [1][2] but there's been some complaints about my edit summary tag usage so ignore it if you like. Skinnyweed 16:21, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The Day Signs

Hello, I'm afraid I don't think that the subject you have written about in the article "The Day Signs" is sufficiently notable enough to warrant inclusion, so I have put it up for deletion. You can share your thoughts in the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2006 June 21. Bob 11:21, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

• • Hi - with regards to the current delete nomination for this article, and your msg to me, I can only restate what has already been said. The article lacks sufficient proof of notability and it is written in an 'unencyclopaedic tone' (ie: insufficiently serious). An simple, effective and rapid test of an article's worthiness is 'would you expect to see this in 'Encyclopaedia Brittanica'?. In the case of your article, in my opinion, the answer is 'no'. Bummer, I know, to have your work deleted - I just suffered it myself. Eddie.willers 11:31, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Your user page

Your user page is not appropriate because it contains a number of templates and categories which are meant for articles or other non-user pages. This project has a purpose and those templates exist to further it. If you like, you can place non-active copies of the templates on your page so it will have the same appearance. I see that other users have alreay brought this to your attention. Please fix the problem yourself, otherwise it will be necessary for others to do so. -Will Beback 00:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I second that, it is most annoying. Fix it. Now. Really, we mean it. --Ministry of Truth 01:35, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

My User Page is just that.......mine.

Grand Master Tumble-Weed

Allow me to insert your comment you misplaced on an entirely unrelated page here: I don't see how my user page article "is so annoying" to quote your words. Could you please clarify this matter? I don't see how someone who does not have a user page article of their own could comment on this matter. But, please feel free to. I will be making changes to nullify the categories as soon as I can, unfortunately I am busy at the moment. The only non-brainless person around here it seems 25:37, 22nd June 2006 (Non-UTC)

Please read the various comments about your inappropriate use of of templates and categories which are meant for articles or other non-user pages carefully and fix all of them as you're already in the process of doing. --Ministry of Truth 09:12, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Inappropriate for you.....and six other people perhaps? The only non-brainless person around here it seems 26:19, 22nd June 2006 (Non-UTC)

Re: AfD

To put it simply, you were the only person wanting to keep the article, and 6 people wanted to delete it. We work on consensus here, usually a supermajority of 2/3 is required to delete an article, and that was easilly achieved in this discussion. Sometimes a very strong argument can overcome a lot of delete votes, but that's an unusual situation, and your argument didn't seem to present any verifiable sources for the claims of the article, which was the whole problem. See WP:V and WP:RS. If this has been covered in newspapers, magazines, etc. please feel free to recreate the article and cite them. Otherwise... don't recreate what was deleted, as that will just be deleted again, and doing it repeatedly could get you blocked for disruption. Thanks. --W.marsh 00:26, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:LHA.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:LHA.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Jordan 1972 (talk) 02:20, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Rocotillo pepper

The article Rocotillo pepper has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not a particularly notable cultivar. I couldn't find much about it in any books, and The Chile Man database only shows that it exists with no further details. I'd suggest a redirect but "rocotillo" is a name for two different peppers, one that's Capsicum baccatum and the other that's Capsicum chinense, so that's not really suitable. Neither is really notable so not sure if it's worth making it into a disambig page.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 09:46, 2 November 2018 (UTC)