User talk:Anna Frodesiak

If I started a thread on your talk page, I am watching. Please reply there.

To leave me a message, click here.

For my availability, image uploads, admin actions, access issues, and disclosure notice, click here.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60

Red links

Hi there, Ms. Frodesiak. I understand you sent me a message that says you were wondering why I have been removing red links. I have been removing red links because they are pointless because if someone were to click a word with a red link, it would directly lead to a page with no article, and I find that really pointless. So there's really no use in why red links should appear in an article at all. Cheers. Meluvswiki (talk). 2:59 PM, October 26, 2015.

(talk page stalker) @Meluvswiki: Per WP:REDDEAL: In general, a red link should be allowed to remain in an article if it links to a term that could plausibly sustain an article, but for which there is no existing candidate article, or article section, under any name. Please see that page for more info. Gparyani (talk) 19:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Meluvswiki. Gparayni is right. Please do not remove redlinks like that. Also, I wrote to you nearly 3 weeks ago about this. Instead of responding right away, you carried on with a further 250 edits, many of which were removing redlinks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:28, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Motherfucker

asshole

Bitch