Talk:Judgespear

Well.

This is a horrible attack article but I can't delete it, because it doesn't violate policy Tigercommander 03:15, 25 February 2015 (EST)

How can you consider it to be a horrible attack article when there ain't even any content in it? If it doesn't get improved, you can delete it as a shit post, since it's just a single sentence and a YouTube link, which can be interpreted as advertisement/personal army request as well. Vermin    10:09, 25 February 2015 (EST)

THAT'S WHY I MARKED IT FOR DELETION! R.I.P Old dirty /b/tard 10:22, 25 February 2015 (EST)

Right, this is an example of something that merits a deathnotice. You've got a new user creating hoards of one-sentence stubs about YouTube nobodies instead of signing on to actually work on a single article. There were issues before about users/admins throwing deathnotices on day-old articles with potential, or because they misinterpreted satire as "shitty attack" for people articles. But this here is known as a shit post, and unless someone takes interest and improves upon it, it's got no place here. Vermin    11:31, 25 February 2015 (EST)

In his defense he might simply be making articles with plans to add content to them in the near future, while it is more advisable to write a rough-drafts of a new article you plan on creating on your user/workshop page he may simply be new to the wiki culture and not know any better. The INSUFFERABLE Tim 12:13, 25 February 2015 (EST)

Yeap, that's why he's not being banned as a spammer. What he needs to do is focus on one article at a time if he wants us to help him out with them, instead of throwing a bunch of YouTube channels into main space in hopes that everyone will write the articles for him. If this is his intention, we need to direct him to Needed/Proposed where he can post the proposed articles and add the reason why they're ED relevant to write about. He has no time limit to finish an article if he actually plans on doing so. Vermin    00:36, 26 February 2015 (EST)