Jump to content

User talk:Aoidh: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 32: Line 32:
Sir, I don't need to get a consensus to add a tea party protest event.[[User:Catsmeow8989|Catsmeow8989]] ([[User talk:Catsmeow8989|talk]]) 20:26, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
Sir, I don't need to get a consensus to add a tea party protest event.[[User:Catsmeow8989|Catsmeow8989]] ([[User talk:Catsmeow8989|talk]]) 20:26, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


So you are telling me that liberal colleges get the final say to what the tea party history is? That's bull dude, most of the sources on this page are from news articles. Those youtube clips CLEARY show ron paul supporters holding tea party signs. that is a primary source
So you are telling me that liberal colleges get the final say to what the tea party history is? That's bull dude, most of the sources on this page are from news articles. Those youtube clips CLEARY show ron paul supporters holding tea party signs. that is a primary source[[User:Catsmeow8989|Catsmeow8989]] ([[User talk:Catsmeow8989|talk]]) 20:32, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:32, 18 December 2015

Please review WP:BLPROD

Seeing your edits at Thomas Atkinson (actor), I expect you have a (common) misconception about WP:BLPROD. If you reread that procedure, it states "The requirements can be summed up as: Only add a BLPPROD if there are no sources in any form that name the subject, but once (properly) placed, it can only be removed if a reliable source is added." The article had a source, before you deleted it. The restriction on removal is only on BLPRODs that were properly placed, and yours was not. As such, I am removing the BLPROD not because the requirements of BLPROD have been satisfied, but because the BLPROD was not properly placed; as an article that had a source that covered some of the information in the article, it is not subject to BLPROD. --Nat Gertler (talk) 06:02, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the BLPPROD, however, the reference used cannot be restored because it is not a reliable source, per multiple discussions at WP:RSN. As adamant as you are about following BLPPROD, I feel as strongly about BLP, and while there was an unreliable source in the article, nothing in WP:BLPPROD says that the unreliable sources cannot be removed from the article, only that the tag shouldn't be placed in that instance. An unreliable source should not be readded to an article just for the sake of procedure. - Aoidh (talk) 06:11, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Categories, lists, and navigation templates. Legobot (talk) 00:03, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting to join a debate for James Stunt

@Aoidh: I'm requesting you to join this Afd discussion. Your comment is valuable to us. Please help us reach a consensus. Thanks -Khocon (talk) 19:12, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

tea party

Excuse me? I'm not the only guilty one on the tea party page, Xenophrenic keeps deleting every single addition i make. For instance he deleted a protest event addition i made Catsmeow8989 (talk) 20:15, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, I don't need to get a consensus to add a tea party protest event.Catsmeow8989 (talk) 20:26, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So you are telling me that liberal colleges get the final say to what the tea party history is? That's bull dude, most of the sources on this page are from news articles. Those youtube clips CLEARY show ron paul supporters holding tea party signs. that is a primary sourceCatsmeow8989 (talk) 20:32, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]