Hassaan19

December 2009

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for Disruptive editing. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below.

Hassaan19, you've been undoing the result of AfD discussions for a considerable time, after multiple warnings. If you are not willing to follow consensus you may not belong on Wikipedia. You've never responded to any admin warnings, which shows that advice makes no impression on you. You've been twice at WP:ANI, and you never made an answer there. Please reconsider before this block becomes permanent. EdJohnston (talk) 14:52, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Lightdownlow-cover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Lightdownlow-cover.jpg. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:29, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for this edit. You have been repeatedly told to wait until the winner is announced but you just refuse to hear what is being said to you. You have to learn to operate within consensus.. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. Nancy ^talk 09:56, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for repeated abuse of editing privileges. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. Nancy ^talk 04:36, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

You were blocked for this edit which specifically goes against the consensus reached at Talk:List of The X Factor finalists (UK series 6)#An independent Wikipedia page for Danyl Johnson) and was also contrary to the warnings you have received previously for recreation of pages against policy. Your stubborn attitude and persistant disruptive behaviour are at odds with the collaborative and collegial nature of the Wikipedia project and I am running out of patience with you - as are many others. The next time you transgress you can expect a very long-term block. Nancy ^talk 04:44, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Block extended for further two weeks & IP blocked for three months

You have been told before that you may not evade blocks and editing restrictions using your IP address 82.36.17.10 however you have resumed your disruption as soon as the prior block on the IP expired. I have therefore extended the block on your named account for a further 2 weeks and the IP address for a further 3 months. Next time it will be permanent. Nancy ^talk 08:17, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Unblock

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Hassaan19 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I will try not to be distruptive although I may still create pages. I will try to not evade blocks and vandalize pages, I will try to create appropriate pages on Wikipedia, and not remove redirects from articles for people who are not notable. I will try my hardest not to do this ever again.

Decline reason:

"Do, or do not. There is no try". -- Daniel Case (talk) 19:19, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Hassaan19 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

"Do, or do not. There is no try"?, what is that meant to mean. I said I promise not to vandalize Wikipedia, accept consensus, Not overrule AfD results, and removing redirects from article for people who have appeared in a reality TV show and done nothing else. I have become used to Wikipedia since I registered in February 2009, that's why I am creating many pages, unaware that they may be inappropriate. I come across to the those articles as they are not fancruft and are notable which is why I step in to improve them, including pages that have been redirected. Please accept this request.

Decline reason:

Looking at what you have written in your latest unblock request I am still unconvinced that you really understand what the problem is. Two things in particular concern me

1. you say that even though you have been editing for nearly a year you still create pages "unaware that they may be inappropriate". This is just not good enough - you have been told repeatedly on this talk page, on User talk:82.36.17.10, in various AFDs and on article talk exactly why what you are doing is inappropriate, disruptive and against consensus. Your comment leads me to believe that you are actually incapable of listening to and absorbing what you are told.
2. you continue to insist that they "are not fancruft and are notable which is why I step in to improve them, including pages that have been redirected". This is worrying to me as your most recent blocks (including the current one) have been for repeatedly changing redirects in to articles against consensus [3][4]. I'm sorry Hassaan but I can take no comfort at all from your statement that you won't just start up again the moment you are unblocked.

I suggest that whilst you are waiting for your block to expire you use the time to not only read properly all the advice that has been left for you here and elsewhere but also to digest and understand what has been said so that on your return you are able to operate clearly and unambiguously within consensus. Nancy ^talk 07:59, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

It means that instead of "I will try" you should have said "I will". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:18, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

In particular, "I will try to not evade blocks and vandalize pages" -- why should any effort or attempts be necessary to not evade blocks and vandalize? We assume good faith around here, and part of that is assuming most people's first nature is not to vandalize and not to evade blocks. Are you somehow different? Is not evading blocks something you need to try? --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 22:52, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Can you explain, in your own words, what was disruptive about your previous edits? This is so that we can be confident that you have properly understood why you were blocked and be sure that you will not carry on as before. Thanks, Nancy ^talk 17:38, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

What I feel was distruptive was removing redirects from people who have just appeared in a reality show and done nothing else. Also putting back an article from someone from X Factor, for example and arguing saying 'This person is notable now, don't redirect', that's one of the things that got me blocked. Evading blocks was one of the things that got my IP blocked for three weeks and this account for 2 weeks. As soon as the block on the IP expired I began doing stuff like removing redirects, which was distruptive. Another thing that I agree was distruptive was not accepting consensus for an article that has been redirected. I feel I should only create articles on Wikipedia that are appropriate, such as the earlier articles I have created, such as Jake Pratt, Elliot Evans, Charlie Wernham, Charlie Green (singer), Bessie Cursons, those are all reality show contestants but they are notable in some way. Articles I have created I feel were inappropriate were articles like Lucie Jones, Danyl Johnson or 2 Grand. I will continue to create appropriate articles on Wikipedia. Above is the reason what was distruptive about my edits. Hassaan19 (talk) 18:15, 30 December 2009 (UTC)}}

AJOUPA + Treyc Cohen

Hassaan, this is a completely non-notable company and I have sent the article for speedy deletion. Please read the notability requirements for companies before creating any other similar ones. I also have a grave concern about Treyc Cohen as she has no notability independent of the X factor. She is not signed to a major label, she has not had a hit record - what were you thinking of creating that article less than 24 hours after you promised to stop doing things like that? Do it once more and I will block you again. Nancy ^talk 12:15, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Same goes for A Time To Be Heard Nancy ^talk 12:22, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Jamie Pugh

Jamie Pugh was a contestant on Britain's Got Talent. Sure he didn't get into the final but if you look at this source (http://www.jamiepugh.co.uk/jamie-pugh-has-a-record-deal/) from his fansite, it says he does have a record deal now and he has a debut single which will be released on 15 Feb 2010. I'm not sure yet whether I should create an article for him since he has a recording contract with a record label, VVR2 records and that is a major label, other BGT contestants like Hollie Steel and Elliot Evans have been signed to it and have articles. He is quite notable but i'm not sure whether I should create the article because I am worried I may be blocked again, because I was unaware about Treyc Cohen's article above because she has a single, but now I realise it didn't chart. I'm not sure yet whether I should create this article. Hassaan19 (talk) 12:39, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Jamie Pugh's fansite is not an independent reliable source & regardless, a record deal means little until he actually has a hit record. I suggest that you back away from creating articles or you are just going to get yourself in to trouble again. There are plenty of other ways you can contribute. Nancy ^talk 12:48, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Hassaan, have a read of WP:MUSICBIO, the notability guideline on musicians. I think the most important criteria is #2 "Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart." An article on Jamie Pugh isn't appropriate. I agree with Nancy that you should probably back away from creating new articles, although at least it's good that you checked before creating this one. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 12:53, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

But would it be appropriate to create the article after it has been released or near the time, when it has charted?. I do understand what you and Nancy are talking about, backing away from creating new articles for now but will it be appropriate to create them later on. Hassaan19 (talk) 13:12, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Creation of articles

Like above, I am checking before I create articles to see if they are appropriate for Wikipedia. Below are the articles I have suggested putting back;

• Lucie Jones - She finished in eighth place on X Factor. She has been signed to a modelling company so that may edge towards notable.

• Danyl Johnson - Again, X Factor, finished in fourth place. Not sure what has happened outside of the series but he may get a record deal from Simon Cowell. John & Edward finished in sixth place and they didn't even reach the semi-finals, so Olly Murs and Stacey Solomon's pages should also be put back because they mde it to the final, and this time last year, the final three finalists (not the winner) (Eoghan Quigg and JLS) had pages, so I am wondering whether I should put back Stacey Solomon and Olly Murs' pages, also Danyl Johnson's page.

I have checked before putting back these articles so I do not get blocked. Hassaan19 (talk) 09:36, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Hassaan, you know the answer to that question already as you have been told repeatedly. Here is my advice to you:

1. Step back from article creation
2. Stop wasting people's time with attention-seeking talk page posts both here and on article talk
3. Read and understand the notability requirements and in particular WP:MUSIC
4. Read and understand Wikipedia's other core guidelines and policies, a good place to start would be WP:FIVE
5. Apply what you have learned in points 3 & 4 to improving existing articles

You might also consider cleaning up your user-page so that it doesn't give the impression that you think that creating articles which have subsequently had to be deleted is some kind of badge of honour. Nancy ^talk 09:42, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Hassaan19! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 577 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Tianna Webster - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 00:05, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Tianna Webster

I have nominated Tianna Webster, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tianna Webster. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Nancy ^talk 15:14, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Connor Panayi

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Connor Panayi. Our verifiability policy requires that all content be cited to a reliable source. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:10, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Joe McElderry/archive1

I strongly advise you to withdraw this nomination. The article, frankly, is nowhere near FA quality. The lead is very short, the article does not appear to be comprehensive, there are unformatted citations, and there citation needed tags in the article. Compare this article to FA-quality articles. You might consider first working the article up through peer review and good article candidacy to prepare for its FAC nomination. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:18, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Dabomb87. It wouldn't pass for GA at the moment, let alone FA. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:22, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Hassaan19, please utilize the peer review, or possibly Good article processes, and familiarize youself with the FAC process and standards before nominating more articles at FAC. I appreciate your efforts, but removing premature noms costs other editors a lot of time and work. There had already been a discussion on the talk page of the article that it wasn't ready for FAC, but you nommed it without consulting other contributors; please refrain from premature noms in the future. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:20, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

re. recording contract petition entries

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to List of The X Factor finalists (UK series 6). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

The references you have applied relating to online petitions - particularly as it was you who created the petitions in the first place - are not notable enough to include in this article. If one of them were to result in a recording contract being awarded, then that may be something worthy of adding, but you shouldn't add them yourself. Regards, Lynbarn (talk) 19:49, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Also removed from Eoghan Quigg. I42 (talk) 20:25, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Best and Worst

Give me your opinions on the best (well-written, organised) and worst (no sources, no sense) articles that I have created. Hassaan19 (talk) 16:38, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Beenkeragh

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Beenkeragh, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://mountainviews.ie/mv/index.php?mtnindex=2. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 14:04, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Philippines Albums Chart

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Philippines Albums Chart, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Bluemask (talk) 05:02, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Philippines singles chart

A tag has been placed on Philippines singles chart requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. I42 (talk) 07:25, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Hollie

I have nominated Hollie, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hollie. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. iBen 20:32, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Aidan Davis

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Aidan Davis. 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/Aidan Davis. 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) 01:05, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Hassan, I have supported keeping the Aidan Davis article, but only because the AfD is based on the personal motivations and convictions of the nominator that are not connected with Wikipedia, rather than on clearly defined infringements against Wikipedia policy. I do nevertheless urge you to refrain from creating articles that are likely to be deleted - by creating them them you are not only wasting your own time, but also a lot of time of the other editors who have to take part in the deletion debates.

Olly Murs (singer)

Hello Hassaan. I am disappointed to have to raise this with you as I thought that we had agreed that you would not go creating any more article without consensus. There are two key points here:

1. Whilst you did the right thing by going to Talk:List of The X Factor finalists (UK series 6) to test whether there was consensus for a standalone article, you then proceeded to create regardless even though it had been clearly pointed out that the notability requirement set out at WP:MUSIC has not yet been met.
2. It is not appropriate to create an article with the sole intention of it being sent to WP:AFD. This is pure and simple disruption and serves no purpose whatsoever.

You have been blocked before for taking unilateral decisions and attempting to over-ride consensus and accepted policy and if you carry on you will be blocked again. I do believe that your intentions are good but you have to understand that if consensus is in opposition to your personal opinion then consensus wins. Every time. Kind regards, Nancy ^talk 17:17, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Holliecover.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Holliecover.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Nancy ^talk 22:27, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:EdelweissHollieSteel.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:EdelweissHollieSteel.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 01:27, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Chloe Hickinbottom

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on Chloe Hickinbottom requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Bazonka (talk) 16:26, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Connor Panayi

The article Connor Panayi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable without substantial coverage in independent reliable sources.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SummerPhD (talk) 19:13, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Final warning

Hassan, what's going on? I thought we had reached an understanding that you would not create articles about people who clearly do not meet the notability guidelines. You even said on the talk page "I understand she isn't notable yet". I know that Britain's Got Talent started again last night so let's us just be clear that you are on your absolute last chance. Create one more dubious article and you will be blocked until well after the series has finished. Nancy ^talk 04:22, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I understand. I created the article in case, because Chloe has been featured in the news a lot over the last few days and is one of the favorites to win. This is similar to what happened with Susan Boyle last year, and she had an article by this time. Tobias Meed, a breakdancer, has independent notability by reaching the final of another reality show in 2008. Here is the source: http://entertainment.stv.tv/tv/170964-britains-got-talent-dancer-has-reality-tv-show-past/. Kieran Gaffney, a 13-year-old drummer, has come back after failing to make the semi-finals but still hasn't done anything outside of the series. One of these must deserve articles, and I will be happy to create them if they meet the notability guidelines. Hassaan19 (talk) 11:08, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

You might want to look to see whether WP:INCUBATE would be useful to you (ask at Wikipedia_talk:Article_Incubator if you are not sure). As for the article subject - bear in mind that BGT has a huge publicity effort behind it and of course they are putting out teasers about forthcoming contestants; becoming notable independently of the programme before it ends is somewhat exceptional. Susan Boyle achieved it but we can't assume it will happen again, and we certainly don't speculate. You could also consider building List_of_Britain's_Got_Talent_finalists_(series_4) when the finalists are known; consensus seems to be that such articles are fine, even if separate articles would not be. I42 (talk) 12:16, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Can I also make a suggestion? If you want to start articles on people you think may become notable in the future, why not create the pages in your own userspace where you can work on them, and then move the pages into the main space when notability has been established? For example, User:Hassaan19/Chloe Hickinbottom. anemoneprojectors talk 12:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I have created the 'article incubator' article, but I need an administrator to look at it and see if it is fit for Wikipedia. Hassaan19 (talk) 15:38, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

WP:1E provides your answer - as of now she has no independent notability. What you have started will be useful if she attains it, but of course an encyclopaedic article would require (referenced) information about her; her performance (which is all there is at the moment) is mostly incidental. I42 (talk) 19:07, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Chloe-hickinbottom-215x300.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Chloe-hickinbottom-215x300.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 07:51, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

April 2010

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 months for repeated abuse of editing privileges. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Nancy ^talk 03:32, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Hassaan, I have lost count of the number of times that I and other editors have spoken to you about creating articles about people who do not meet the notability guidelines and you have been blocked on several previous occasions for the same thing. Most recently I posted here on the 18 April regarding Chloe Hickinbottom and yet a few days later you do this. Not only did you recreate the article without any consensus to do so but you are also adding to the disruption by creating an article with the sole intention of sending it to AFD which is another thing you have been warned against doing. When we last spoke I made it clear that you were on a final warning and that an extended block would be the next step should you decide to continue to edit by your own rules. I have therefore blocked you for 2 months; consider yourself lucky that it was not indefinite. I have also blocked your IP address, 82.36.17.10, for a corresponding period.

I am sad that it has come to this again but it appears that blocking is the only way to make you stop. Nancy ^talk 03:52, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Kieran Gaffney

Did you mean to create Kieran Gaffney in your userspace? AnemoneProjectors 20:20, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Kieran Gaffney

The article Kieran Gaffney has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. I42 (talk) 10:19, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

July 2010

Please stop. If you continue to introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, such as Harry Mondryk, you may be blocked from editing. If you need guidance on how to create appropriate pages, try using the Article Wizard. You have just ended a 2-month ban for repeatedly creating articles on non-notable talent show contestants and the first thing you did on your return was create two new articles on non-notable talent show contestants. I42 (talk) 10:27, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Harry Mondryk

I have nominated Harry Mondryk, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry Mondryk. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. I42 (talk) 10:33, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Blocked

Enough is enough. I indicated at the time of your last block that you were lucky it was not indefinite. You now return and with your very first edit you create another article about a failed talent show contestant. You then followed it with Kieran Gaffney, who again you know form previous conversations does not meet the notability requirement, to compound the problem it is also a biography of a living person with no references whatsoever. This is enough to indicate to me that the only way to stop your continued disruption is to block you again; this time I'm afraid it is indefinite. You may of course appeal this block in the usual way by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. Nancy ^talk 12:45, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jessica Hammond

The article Jessica Hammond has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

the object is not notable. She certainly must not be described as "truly destined for Musical Stardom" like her mom or little friend wrote it. Nobody cares what she is doing for her A-Levels. I understand we must not throw the baby out with the bathwater yet I cannot find a redeeming point. The sources as far as I see are minor/local, not credible

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Eugene-elgato (talk) 13:14, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Hollie Steel songs

A tag has been placed on Category:Hollie Steel songs indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:06, 18 August 2021 (UTC)