Unormal

Ridiculous.

I wrote a perfectly good article. These warnings are because of other editors with the same IP Address. If the mod has enough time to comb for links, he should have enough time to reasonably sort out the warnings and ban issuance.

-

I delete things from Wikipedia when I find them of little relevance or value. I apologize for offending you.

Scriptlogic

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Scriptlogic, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. A. B. ^(talk) 02:52, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

-

I noticed this is a different mod; nonetheless it does not excuse Requisition's obvious personal attack. My article as originally submitted was fine. I have a hard time seeing how something can be 'link spam' when the text does not change at all. There's no content difference between my original page and my original page without the links other than the list of software, which remains anyway, but is not linked. This is just LESS useful, and fails to use hypertext as a medium. This is NOT a print encyclopedia. It's reasonable if the links were extraneous text in the first place, but they were not.

For reference, here's the article as I submitted it, and never editied again afterwards: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scriptlogic&oldid=63438481

I find it very hard to find anything, other than a couple very minor phrases, that is particularly objectionable. ^(talk) 10:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Nomination of ScriptLogic for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ScriptLogic 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/ScriptLogic 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. DGG ( talk ) 04:48, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ScriptLogicLogoBorder.PNG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ScriptLogicLogoBorder.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:39, 26 December 2017 (UTC)