User talk:Bobtoo

An editor has expressed a concern that this account may be a sockpuppet of Johnyajohn (talk · contribs · logs).
Please refer to Bahram Elahi (and deleted edits), Cecil W. Stoughton, Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Johnyajohn for evidence.

Account information: block log – contribs – logs – abuse log – CentralAuth

Notability of Bahram Elahi

A tag has been placed on Bahram Elahi, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it 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 assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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 page (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. 172.135.109.28 12:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Takashi Oyama

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Takashi Oyama, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Gyrofrog (talk) 22:25, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please also provide Oyama's name in kanji, and fuller and correct details for the reference materials that you cite. Thank you. -- Hoary 13:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bobtoo! You say The Oyama photographer and his photographs have been published many times and well documented. You obviously can't read Japanese or I would not have to explain to you who he is. As it happens, I can read Japanese. I don't claim that I can read Japanese so well, but I think I can do so well enough for this purpose. (If my Japanese fails me, I'll ask my chums at WikiProject Japan.) Now, none of us can look up Oyama in Japanese in (for example) Google without knowing the kanji for his full name (there are too many imaginable options), which is why I asked you on 17 September. You didn't respond. However, I did look up any photographer named おおやま or (very much less likely) おやま in Nihon no shashinka (日本の写真家) / Biographic Dictionary of Japanese Photography (Tokyo: Nichigai Associates, 2005; ISBN 4-8169-1948-1): there's no mention of any Oyama there. This in itself is not damning; the editors of that book may have overlooked him. So come on, please take one of these options:

Tell me his name in Japanese script.
Clearly specify credible sources. (The information you gave in the article is worthless.)
Admit that he's fictional.

Hoary 08:25, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

October 2007

Please do not undo other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in Death of Marilyn Monroe ([1], [2]), or you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. The three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the 3RR. Thank you. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 08:40, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Death of Marilyn Monroe. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. -- WebHamster 11:28, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule at Death of Marilyn Monroe. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Evidence: [3], [4], [5], [6] -- Gyrofrog (talk) 13:28, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gyrofrog

"Gyrofrog" Joe, I just looked at your history and see you are a very sick individual and have a major power struggle issue in your head. I see you have also censured many other people on Wiki and have a major ego problem. I have also been contacted by an individual who is collecting evidance to sue you. What you are doing is unconstitutional and against freedom of speech and press. Be carful you don't make too many enemies for yourself... Or it may be too late for that?

You have been indefinitely blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for making legal threats. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Mr.Z-man 03:44, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may also want to read Wikipedia:Free speech. Mr.Z-man 03:46, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I am not the person who made the threat

Decline reason:

This edit is enough for me to tell that you're the one that made threats (even if it was on someone else's behalf). - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 08:20, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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.