User talk:Schatzberg

July 2008[edit]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Kyle Schickner. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Dravecky (talk) 09:01, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, I'm editing the page for speedy deletion. You may disagree with it, but lets keep that upto Admin, whether it should be deleted or not. Please respect my edits. It is not vandalism. However, you undoing my edits constitutes vandalism. Thanks. Schatzberg (talk) 09:03, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Repeatedly placing a prod tag on an article is vandalism, per WP policies. If you believe an article meets the criteria for deletion, the proper step after a prod tag has been removed is to nominate the article for deletion, not to replace the prod tag. - Dravecky (talk) 09:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing, such as the edit you made to Kyle Schickner. If your vandalism continues, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Dravecky (talk) 09:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is hardly "disruptive editing". The bottom line is you don't want something deleted that you contributed to.Oh well, the article doesn't belong there in the first place. Let Adin. decide if it should stay or go. And stop making threats, or I will report you as well. Schatzberg (talk) 16:32, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kyle Schickner[edit]

Please read the wikipedia deletion policy. It says among other thinds the the Prod template can only be placed on an article once. It doesn't make any difference who removes it or why, but once it is removed from an article it can not be readded. If you still believe that Kyle Schickner should be deleted the next step in the process is to nominate the article at articles for deletion. Continuously re adding the Prod template is disruptive to the project and you could be blocked for doing it. Thank you. Jons63 (talk) 09:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I went back and read the article thoroughly. I believe if you do nominate this article for deletion either under Speedy Delete criteria or Articles for Deletion, the outcome will be the same. The article will be retained. My advice to you is to give up the fight to have this article deleted. Jons63 (talk) 09:52, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will not give up the fight to have the article deleted. I am hereby asking that the article be deleted, and for the above listed Davecky to lay off with the threats, or I will report him as well. It works both ways. I am asking Admin to remove this article, because it has no bearing, and the person they are talking about is a nobody. Simply put, Kyle Schickner does not deserve a page here. Has no merit whatsoever. Schatzberg (talk) 16:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you still believe it should be deleted, go tothis section of Articles for Deletion and follow the instructions. State your case as to why it doesn't belong. Then people will discuss the article for 7 days and at the end of the time an administrator will review the comments and determine what the consensus is. If the consensus is to delete, then it will be deleted, if there is no consensus or the consensus is to kee,p the article will be kept. Good Luck Jons63 (talk) 08:36, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Kyle Schickner[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Kyle Schickner, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kyle Schickner. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Jons63 (talk) 10:05, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Kyle Schickner. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. triwbe (talk) 19:42, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]