Please tell me how to put a lock on a page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhruv vij (talk • contribs) 14:25, 30 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What page do you want locked? This would only happen if there was a significant ongoing content dispute on the page in question resulting in an ongoing edit war, which users had been unable to resolve on the talk page. If that applied, you would file a request at requests for page protection here. If that doesn't apply then you have no chance, as pages are only locked in very limited circumstances and for short time periods. Valenciano (talk) 18:29, 2 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhruv vij (talk • contribs) 14:30, 4 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ya que usted dice dominar el español perfectamente, me dirigiré a usted usándolo, ya que es mi idioma. Me parece una absoluta vergüenza su actitud en esta discusión, indagando y buscando con lupa noticias ¡¡¡de 2004!!! como esa del ABC. La gente como yo que habitamos en la Costa del Sol sabemos que de existir algún tipo de criminalidad organizada en la Costa del Sol, es algo absolutamente minoritario, y los niveles de criminalidad son bajísimos. Ninguna de esas referencias en ningún caso, avalan la aparición de esos datos en un párrafo de historia de la Costa del Sol, que apenas ocupa 10 renglones.

Dado su apodo, Valenciano, no me extrañaría que detrás de todo ese supuesto interés por incluir toda esa rocambolesca información, solo exista un interés de atacar a la imagen turística de la Costa del Sol. Su insistencia por incluir esa trivial y absolutamente irrelevante información en una sección tan pequeña, no me deja cabida a ninguna otra clase de explicación. Ya que en ningún caso le veo interesado en incluir otro tipo de datos para mejorar el artículo con informaciones relevantes de la Costa del Sol.

Le advierto que tras este último aporte suyo a la discusión voy a ser absolutamente intransigente, y nadie excepto un bibliotecario podrá modificar el artículo en adelante. Cualquier mínima introducción de información va a tener que ser escrupulosamente discutida y consensuada, o le llevaré al tablón por romper las reglas de discusión y solicitaré la protección total del artículo. --LTblb (talk) 10:25, 12 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yo no tengo ningun problema con usted comunicarse conmigo en espanyol, sin embargo, creo que seria mejor comunicarse en Ingles y en la pagina del artículo en cuestion. Esto tiene la ventaja de centralizar la discusion y permitir que las personas que no hablan espanyol para contribuir a la discusion. Valenciano (talk) 19:12, 12 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

LLeva razón, y le pido disculpas por mi brusquedad, probablemente mi actitud haya sido ciertamente injusta con usted. Un saludo.--LTblb (talk) 21:59, 12 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yo tambien pido disculpas si se he ofendido. No es mi intencion molestarle. Si cooperamos en esto, podemos producir un mejor articulo. La costa merece mejor que las 15 lineas dedicadas a el.Valenciano (talk) 22:13, 12 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aunque mi inglés es, desgraciadamente, bastante pobre, intentaré ayudarle en cualquier cosa que me solicite. Un saludo. --LTblb (talk) 23:01, 12 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. I notice you've been removing a lot of categories for dead people citing WP:BLPCAT as the justification. The relevant guideline for deceased people is WP:CAT/R, which is actually slightly different; I suspect most of the people you're removing the category from would be able to pass that criterion. Either way, probably better to cite the proper guideline to make it easier for people to follow. Frickeg (talk) 23:47, 15 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the info, that does make things a little different, in the ones I've looked at I was usually considering whether their religion was sourced and whether it was relevant to their notability. Where there was any doubt, I left the category in. If it's a simple case of a reference that x belongs to a particular religion being sufficient, that's not something I'd agree with, but if it's consensus, also not something I'm going to edit against. I think I'll ask on the talk page for clarification. Valenciano (talk) 14:50, 16 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kind of the same issue, but slightly different. You removed a category with this edit from the biography of a living person with a summary that there was nothing in the article to suggest his Catholicism contributed to his notability. But the composer in question is perhaps best known (beyond his unrelated legal career) for composing Masses and in particular, a Papal Mass for World Youth Day. Seems like a contributing factor to me. Your thoughts? Stalwart111 22:39, 16 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're right, I've restored the cat to that. Valenciano (talk) 07:56, 17 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I've seen your recent amendment to the stats displayed in the infobox at Roberto Soldado, and wanted to let you know these account for league stats only; other competitions are excluded. Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 19:25, 22 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem, though we should probably add a hidden comment in the infobox to that effect. Valenciano (talk) 07:34, 23 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited European Party of Ukraine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ukrainian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:32, 6 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Valenciano, I am writing to request your assistance with the wiki article Evan Strong. There are two alerts at the top of the page that I am requesting your help with. First, I have removed all sources that could be considered "self published" and would like your review to see if the alert can be removed. Second, I understand the conflict of interest policy, but have attempted to be as objective as possible in editing the article on Evan Strong. What can we do here regarding the alert about this issue? Can we invite other wiki editors to review the article for accuracy? Is that something you can help with to be able to be able to release the alert? Thanks, rogerestrong Rogerestrong (talk) 01:47, 14 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Japanese invasion of Thailand, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Britain (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:00, 27 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for fixing it -- I don't know what I was thinking at the moment. --Jmk (talk) 18:25, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem, easy and common mistake a lot of people make. Valenciano (talk) 18:35, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello my friend :) I do not wish to be in a edit war in Largest cities in Europe but two editors keep changing the article after we discussed on the talk page, they are removing cities who has been on the list for a long time. Lactasamir (talk) 19:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I appreciate that, but I feel they have made a reasonable argument there. I've commented on the talk page and suggest we all discuss it there. Either way, I count four reverts of yours in a 24 hour period and don't want you to be blocked, so please discuss rather than reverting the content. Valenciano (talk) 20:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Valenciano :) I now feel that the needed sources on Talk:Largest cities in Europe are found, as you requested, to validate that many international institutions regards the three Caucasus states as being a part of Europe, and I hope that maybe you will look at them, and maybe restore the list as you may find suitable. So we can avoid further controversies. thank you my friend :) Lactasamir (talk) 19:42, 17 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have responded to your comment, please read and review. Not sure how to "talk" effectively through this platform.

Thanks

Quadtripplea (talk) 19:56, 15 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Valenciano! Thank you for your comment. I have re-done the changes to the Dexter episodes page, this time with edit comment! Cheers, Daniel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.73.11 (talk) 23:08, 11 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, can you just forget about this? The information in the article you try to remove is confirmed by federal Russian TV channels and newspapers. Please stop being so pestiferous. You're not right anyways.--95.72.99.126 (talk) 12:59, 25 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That is currently being discussed at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#COI_on_All_Tomorrow.27s_Parties_.28band.29. In the meantime make your case there and please don't remove maintenance templates. Valenciano (talk) 18:02, 25 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, it's a mistake. Thank you! Janetaste --Janetaste (talk) 19:08, 4 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. I thought it only right to inform you that I have mentioned you Thank you. --Rockysantos (talk) 22:01, 7 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the info, it looks like LTblb is likely to be blocked for sockpuppetry. As my only real involvement with them comes from the Costa Del Sol stuff above, I'll wait for the outcome of the SPI before I comment. Valenciano (talk) 06:36, 8 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Your submission of 1957 Valencia flood at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Crispulop (talk) 20:20, 15 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I also noticed that in the article you have some neighborhoods by their Valencian name rather than Castillian, while you have other names in Castillian. This is ofcourse no problem for DYK, I just noticed it while reading the article, being familiar with the city of Valencia myself. You might wish to pick on or the other for consistency. Like I said in the DYK nomination, good job on creating the article. It's nice to see that someone concerns himself with writing about Valencia.

Thanks for reviewing that, I've moved the cites as required. Regarding the district names, fair point. I worked in Marxalenes so was used to hearing/seeing both variants and that's slipped into the article. I'll tweak that a little later. Valenciano (talk) 23:06, 15 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	You are cordially invited to join WikiProject Eurovision!
	You appear to be someone that may be interested in joining WikiProject Eurovision. Please accept this formal invitation from a current member of the project. We offer a place for you to connect with users who also like Eurovision and facilitate team work in the development of Eurovision articles.
	If you decide to join the project, please add your name to this list, and add the project talk page to your watchlist.
	I hope you accept! - Wesley Mᴥuse 20:36, 17 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On 20 November 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1957 Valencia flood, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the 1957 Valencia flood caused the deaths of at least 81 people and led to the rerouting of the city's main river, the Turia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1957 Valencia flood. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

My mistake, thanks for noticing that, I fixed it. Orser67 (talk) 14:32, 22 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please add them when you have them.

Thanks in advance,

EdwardRech (talk) 17:47, 23 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done. That was a very depressing day out. Valenciano (talk) 22:22, 23 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So as is usual with the boxing section of this site, some editor will go around adding Irish into as many boxers backgrounds as possible regardless of evidence or whatever. Recently an IP (70.120.95.221, which seems somehow familiar with another IP in the past) has been making such edits as VintageKits, Sweeney and River City Boy where/are fond of.

Most curious another IP seems to be tracking 70.120.95.221 and reverting them leaving this message on their talk page, a message that was removed by River City Boy - their first edit here since August. Most curious and possibly a return to old habit via this IP. Mabuska ^(talk) 22:26, 24 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is quite possibly vk, but as the previous SPI came up inconclusive, I'm reluctant to file another without more evidence. Valenciano (talk) 11:36, 25 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I know that, however the sock-puppetry in this case may be River City Boy using that IP to circumvent the previous scrutiny that they have had in regards to the ethnicity issue. Mabuska ^(talk) 13:04, 25 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's more than possible, but again, having filed an SPI once, I'm reluctant to do so again without strong evidence as it could be labelled as harassment otherwise. Valenciano (talk) 13:19, 25 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just to note I filed an SPI on the IP and River City Boy. Doing a little digging and it would appear that River City Boy is quite similar to an older IP account which I've also cited in the SPI. Maybe or maybe not VK, but definitely a system of block scrutiny evasion in my view. Mabuska ^(talk) 16:53, 2 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That definitely does look like a case of evasion. We'll see what the SPI comes up with. Valenciano (talk) 17:56, 6 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Jan Metzler at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with ((db-g7)), or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 06:50, 1 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could you please find me on the terms and conditions page where I couldn't right about the zodiac. And I never said that. I meant that i'd put it up for speedy deletion if........it's not good. So i'd be watching him to see if his edits and creations are duplicates or they are not historically, scientifically, and mathematically accurate. I never said i'd disrupt Wikipedia to make a point. I never said those words. you assumed it. Assumption is makes an ass out of you and me. One of my favourite sayings

Yours Sinserly

Goldrawer7

samuel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldrawer7 (talk • contribs) 11:52, 1 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In this case the article you created was based on a book which was not possible to be traced. That means that the book either doesn't exist or that it could be a small dubious source. Either way, you would need to find much better sources which make the same claims. Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable_sources makes it clear that articles must be based on "reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." Wikipedia also doesn't give undue prominence to fringe theories (see WP:FRINGE) which your article did. Valenciano (talk) 12:06, 1 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Michael O'Hare's involvement in the case is in the book The Zodiac Murders-Solved. to find it. Go to Zodiackiller.com and click on it on the home page. The Richard Gaikowski's involvement in the case is on the one time tv show spinoff Richard Gaikowski-Zodiac Killer Murders Solved — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldrawer7 (talk • contribs) 12:18, 1 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That website makes it clear that the book is a self published source. WP:SPS says "Anyone can create a personal web page or publish their own book, and also claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs (as distinguished from newsblogs, above), Internet forum postings, and tweets, are largely not acceptable as sources. The TV show is a one off theory. Such ideas would need to have been given much greater prominence and coverage by experts on the subject in reliable sources before we could include them in the main Zodiac article, let alone spin them off into a separate article. I don't see that such coverage exists and therefore we shouldn't have it on here. Valenciano (talk) 12:25, 1 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Zodiackiller.com was started by a man. Who was the brother of Betty Lou Jensen. The second victim. And you say he isn't a realiable source, the book was written by a man who got contacted by the killer via post. They are both Zodiac Experts. They know what they're talking about. No one can change it. Sure people can write their own books on people who think they know who the killer is. The ones that get actually noticed are. In fact accurate. the tv show was made by Zodiac experts and the police. You call these unrealiable sources. If you can edit stuff on Zodiackiller.com. what about Wikipedia. This is why it's unpopular because anyone can edit it. IT IS UNACCURATE!

Yours Sinserly Goldrawer7

Samuel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldrawer7 (talk • contribs) 12:31, 1 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Anyone can write a letter to someone claiming to be the killer. Anyone can speculate about who the killer is. The point is that not enough people in other reliable sources have taken those claims seriously. If they're only made in that one self published source, they don't go in. Simple really. Valenciano (talk) 13:18, 1 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

for your comment on dawp regarding da:Ludwig Heidler. The Danish article looks very dubious indeed. Pugilist (talk) 21:55, 10 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're welcome. I can see that the hoax article has been deleted there and the offender blocked. Valenciano (talk) 18:23, 11 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On 13 December 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jan Metzler, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Jan Metzler got Worms for his party for the first time in 64 years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jan Metzler. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 16:48, 13 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

politics in Europe
Thank you, travelled veteran user in many languages, for quality articles on events, politics and politicians in Europe, such as Jan Metzler - with a sense of humour, Valencia (Spanish Congress Electoral District) and Monbar Hotel attack, for not avoiding areas of conflict such as Ireland and ETA attacks, for precise language and explaining things simply, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:37, 15 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

this series Thousand East of The Secrets that you revived is hoax that User talk:Maryank3 creating fake korean dramas which sorucs didn't exist by --Sunuraju (talk) 13:39, 20 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Even if you believe that it is a hoax, you shouldn't blank the page without explaining it in an edit summary, as that looks like you've vandalised. The correct procedure is to tag it as a hoax, as explained at Wikipedia:Hoaxes#Dealing_with_hoaxes. If the hoax was blatant (and as a non-Korean speaker, I can't verify that it is in this case) you could nominate for speedy deletion as explained at WP:G3. Alternatively you would nominate for deletion as expained at WP:AFD. If you need assistance doing that, let me know and I'll try to help. Valenciano (talk) 14:06, 20 December 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Valenciano, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Jesse rodriguez swimmer, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: gold medal in a national competion is an assertion of importance. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. ϢereSpielChequers 08:53, 10 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, based on my CSD log, I didn't tag that for speedy deletion. Most likely I restored a CSD tag which the page creator removed. As the page was deleted, I unfortunately can't view the page in question. Valenciano (talk) 11:36, 10 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, sorry the history gets complex, and I should have messaged someone else. You just reinstated an A7 tag and it has now been (in my view correctly) deleted G4. ϢereSpielChequers 15:29, 10 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah ok. I always do WP:BEFORE when adding A7 tags myself, but on this occasion, someone else had done it and a quick glance didn't suggest notability, so that is also my mistake. I'll watch out for that in future, thanks for pointing it out. Valenciano (talk) 15:37, 10 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem, it is always worth remembering that a worrying proportion of speedy deletion tags are wrong, or cease to be correct as articles change. Happy editing. ϢereSpielChequers 15:43, 10 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Valenciano. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Kim Stricker, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: claim on talk page that OTRS have been sent permission to use this content. I will send the article to AFD though as the subject doesn't appear to be notable. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 19:16, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's fine, the claim was made on the talk page after I'd added the G12. The text is lifted verbatim from the subject's website by someone claiming to be his son and I couldn't find anything else to suggest he met WP:BIO. I'll have a look at the AFD. Valenciano (talk) 19:39, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi

MSS Sajal 06:11, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rosemarie Hein, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CDU (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 20 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for your comment on my change to the Hof link in the Hans-Peter Friedrich article. I appreciate that kind of feedback Lavoulte (talk) 08:37, 3 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Frankfurt am Main I (electoral district), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Peter Horn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 4 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	Hello sir
	hello sir how do i delete the page i made? WTF AM I DOINGDennis I. Siglos Jr. (talk) 08:35, 8 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's been deleted. Valenciano (talk) 10:57, 8 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the revert! I'm using a new tool called Vada, and it lags sometimes so I revert the wrong person. -Newyorkadam (talk) 13:40, 14 March 2014 (UTC)NewyorkadamReply[reply]

I was wondering about that. I'd gone to your talk page to post a warning but saw longer term productive edits, so assumed it was just an honest mistake, don't template the regulars and all that. Valenciano (talk) 13:41, 14 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect St Basils School. Since you had some involvement with the St Basils School redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Herald talk with me 12:30, 15 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. In Germany nobody celebrates birthday of the SS or Gestapo. In Germany nobody respects Heinrich Himmler (including). You are moderator for new pages ONLY (and do not need play in the war edits also). We need wait the decision of authorized person (you has rights for new pages: it is the old page). Learn more about victims and compare with the Nazism - you can here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Book_of_Communism (may be errors in the figures, but the overall is clear). Here we can understand that the Checa and NKVD are the "pioneers" for all bloody communist organizations in many countries: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_Communist_regimes#Terminology :

"Communist regimes "Communist regimes" refers to those countries who declared themselves to be socialist states under the Marxist-Leninist, Stalinist, or Maoist definition (in other words, "communist states") at some point in their history."

This is not original research, but only facts with the proofs (long time ago is known for specialists and not only). Biographies of living persons (if truth - everyone has right know). Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution here. The promotion of genocide in this case: happiness in the day of creation of the bloody organization for implement task, who has name the genocide vs millions of people in those terrible years, on the official level in our time. And the Cheka is "pioneer" (Marxism-Leninism - is the indicator). Thanks for the attention. - 128.73.196.40 (talk) 14:08, 16 March 2014 (UTC).Reply[reply]

I'm afraid you misunderstand how Wikipedia works. I am no moderator (Wikipedia doesn't have them.) I don't have any special rights for new pages and, conversely, I don't need any special rights to uphold Wikipedia's policies on biographies of living persons. I don't understand any of your points about Communism. Dmitry Medvedev, whose page you are adding Category:Human rights abuses to, is not a Marxist-Leninist, nor has he been convicted of any genocide or human rights abuses, so the addition of that category to his page is unacceptable per WP:NPOV and WP:BLPCAT. I suggest you use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes like that. Valenciano (talk) 14:26, 16 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Regarding Bikram Singh Majithia, i was just going to support with link and you removed it. Please let me provide the references. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.50.81.220 (talk) 07:15, 22 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In cases like that, it's better to add the reference first, as unsourced claims are removed per WP:BLP. Valenciano (talk) 07:29, 22 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Valenciano, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Joshus moloney, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Olaf Davis (talk) 17:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, but in this case I'm not seeing the credible claim of significance, the article says that someone was regarded by a couple of schoolmates as being a litterer, and they set up a self published site to that effect. There is nothing on google about this person, so it veers betwen hoax and A7. Valenciano (talk) 17:25, 23 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]