User talk:Cilla1987

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome!

Hello, Cilla1987! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! SwisterTwister talk 06:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

SwisterTwister talk 06:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Charlotte Devaney

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Charlotte Devaney, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Theroadislong (talk) 13:33, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lose_Friends_%26_Alienate_People_(film)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0455538/fullcredits

Creating a page for Charlotte Devaney

Hi Cilla1987, I noticed that you've tried to recreate the page on Charlotte Devaney, an article which was previously deleted (the discussion can be found here). Given that this deletion happened two months ago it is highly unlikely a new article would be accepted (unless something majorly news-worthy happened in her life). If you have any further questions, feel free to ping me using {{u|Primefac}} in your response to this note. Cheers, Primefac (talk) 22:02, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Charlotte Devaney is a hollywood credited actress
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lose_Friends_%26_Alienate_People_(film)
as well as international dj and producer, she has recently released singles with fatman scoop & snoop dogg.
She had a page for 6 years, why have you deleted it now? She is the only actress on the How to lose friends wiki who now dosnt have a page, why would you do this? Primefac
also if you would like some " news worthy" stuff pls ask as there is quite alot of stuff out there, all is unbiased stuff. thanks Primefac—Preceding unsigned comment added by Cilla1987 (talk • contribs) 22:12, 4 November 2014
Apparently it took us quite some time to notice that we should not have an article about Devaney. That's not much of a surprise given that we have millions of articles and only a few thousand active editors - some pages simply get overlooked. An article's age, however, is no reason to keep it if it otherwise fails our criteria. If Devaney meets Wikipedia's standards of notability (laid out in WP:NACTOR, WP:MUSIC and more generally WP:BIO and WP:N), in short if significant coverage in reliable independent sources such as newspapers or reputable magazines exists (not blogs or social media, not her own website or pages affiliated with her, not mere directories like IMDb or Discogs), I'd suggest you use the Article Wizard to write a draft that summarizes what those sources say about Devaney (see WP:Referencing for beginners on how to easily cite the sources) and submit it for a review by an experienced editor. Unless that draft is in significantly better shape than the article that was deleted in that deletion discussion, however, it will not be accepted. If you cannot find at least three to five clearly reliable third-party sources that discuss Devaney in some detail, it's probably not worth the effort.
On an unrelated note, to clarify who wrote what, please sign your comments on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). That will automatically be turned into a signature that contains your username, a link to your talk page, and a timestamp, just like Primefac's signature above and mine here. Yours, Huon (talk) 22:43, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

right ok, well thats a little more helpful. Im not sure why you "shouldnt" have an article on Devaney as she is a credited actress on your own site. :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lose_Friends_%26_Alienate_People_(film) We will put together an article that hopefully will please you , thanks Huon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cilla1987 (talk • contribs) 22:51, 4 November 2014

Not every actor who received film credits is notable enough to be the subject of an article of their own. To establish that Devaney is, we'll need third-party coverage that discusses herself, not just the film, in some detail. Huon (talk) 22:58, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ok we will put something together, thansk for your help Huon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cilla1987 (talk • contribs) 23:02, 4 November 2014

Your submission at Articles for creation: Charlotte Devaney (October 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister was:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
SwisterTwister talk 06:37, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Charlotte Devaney (October 21)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister was:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
SwisterTwister talk 23:06, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Charlotte Devaney (December 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Robert McClenon (talk) 21:30, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Teahouse logo
Hello! Cilla1987, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Robert McClenon (talk) 21:30, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Charlotte Devaney has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Charlotte Devaney. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 21:31, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Charlotte Devaney (December 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was:
In its current state, it is virtually impossible to ascertain whether or not the person is notable. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful: The article needs to be formatted properly, as do the citations. Just throwing links on a page is probably not a good idea.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Onel5969 TT me 12:36, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Charlotte Devaney (December 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by LaMona was:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
LaMona (talk) 17:36, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Charlotte Devaney (January 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CatcherStorm was:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
CatcherStorm talk 19:20, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017

Information icon Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Charlotte Devaney, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 23:34, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Charlotte Devaney shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. CBS527Talk 13:47, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Primefac (talk) 21:04, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Cilla1987 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #18149 was submitted on Apr 27, 2017 22:07:36. This review is now closed.


--UTRSBot (talk) 22:07, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have not been blocked from editing your talk page, so please place further unblock requests on this page. Primefac (talk) 22:23, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 23:26, 11 December 2017 (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).

Cilla1987 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here Cilla1987 (talk) 10:08, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your friend created an account on your computer then immediately edited an article for which you were engaged in an edit war. And you've previously been caught using multiple accounts. Nope, sorry, this isn't plausible. The block is legitimate. Yamla (talk) 11:43, 12 December 2017 (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.

Bbb23 i have only got one account, my friend logged into my lap top so was their account not mine. Can you please re-enable my account for editing

many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cilla1987 (talk • contribs)

@Bbb23: Ping so that they can review this request. ToThAc (talk) 11:03, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
unsigned Yamla what my friend did was nothing to do with me, i was not engaged in an edit war. I was adding legitimate edits.
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:Cilla1987"