User talk:Erwin: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 11:41, 6 March 2010

Deletion of article Ambarish Srivastava

Spjayswal67 (talk) 08:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC) I have provided all possible references including newspaper cuttings, Pics of all awards and certificates related to article Ambarish Srivastava still it was deleted while Ambarish Srivastava is a prominent and notable person who is a best architectural engineer of sitapur who is at topmost position as well as a prominent Hindi Auther and poet, he is the first person who got the Indira Gandhi Priydarshini Award at Sitapur, although first of all this award was awarded to mother teresa so What should be the criteria of notability? and how it should be prove as per your rules? because in our country coverage in news papers are to much important than coverage in website. now i am feeling insulting myself and it appears i am wasting my valuable time with wikipedia so i can not work with wikipedia! so bye.... for ever and it is suggested that you should review your policies in future. Sad: S. P. Jaiswal. Please delete my account![reply]

Re: AfD nomination of Softlink

I am slowly accumulating articles and referencing them as best I can. It wasn't covered in Library Technology Reports as far as I can see, but it was in their side publication, "Smart Libraries", which I have Referenced. I have also included a review of Liberty by "Information World Review". I appreciate your comments, as this is my first foray into developing content for Wikipedia and the associated guidelines take some getting used to.Sjritchie (talk) 02:07, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

STOP your bot NOW

Erwin, your bot85 just got someone indefinitely blocked. Please stop your bot now!

Your bot left a message at the user talk page of Kmweber, an article creator. It said to please leave comments at the AFD. After he did, he was blocked. The user is banned from namespace but nobody thought of the possibility that an article creator could have insights to why an article should be kept.

As a direct result of following your bot's instructions, a person is in trouble. You should apologize to ANI (the topic is being discussed regarding article Rodney Watson), Kmweber's talk page, and possibly even to ArbCom.

I'm certain that you did not purposely cause someone to be blocked. However, you should fix problems that you caused. That is like paying for damage for a car accident (accident, not on purpose), or paying for hospital care if someone slips and falls in your store. Ipromise (talk) 08:30, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is ridiculous. It's a user's own job to respect any ArbCom rulings concerning himself. It's definitely not mine and most certainly not a bot's job. --Erwin (talk) 11:41, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 08:30, 6 March 2010 edit Ipromise (talk \| contribs) 210 edits →‎STOP your bot NOW: new section ← Previous edit		Revision as of 11:41, 6 March 2010 edit undo Erwin (talk \| contribs) Rollbackers 1,485 edits →‎STOP your bot NOW: Re Next edit →
Line 24:		Line 24:

	I'm certain that you did not purposely cause someone to be blocked. However, you should fix problems that you caused. That is like paying for damage for a car accident (accident, not on purpose), or paying for hospital care if someone slips and falls in your store. [[User:Ipromise\|Ipromise]] ([[User talk:Ipromise\|talk]]) 08:30, 6 March 2010 (UTC)		I'm certain that you did not purposely cause someone to be blocked. However, you should fix problems that you caused. That is like paying for damage for a car accident (accident, not on purpose), or paying for hospital care if someone slips and falls in your store. [[User:Ipromise\|Ipromise]] ([[User talk:Ipromise\|talk]]) 08:30, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

			:This is ridiculous. It's a user's own job to respect any ArbCom rulings concerning himself. It's definitely not mine and most certainly not a bot's job. --[[User:Erwin\|Erwin]] ([[User talk:Erwin#top\|talk]]) 11:41, 6 March 2010 (UTC)