User talk:79.183.203.120

Your submission at Articles for creation: Israel Eliraz has been accepted

Israel Eliraz, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. You may wish to consider registering an account so you can create articles yourself.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

KGirl ^{(Wanna chat?)} 21:18, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Debris documentar has been accepted

Debris documentar, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. You may wish to consider registering an account so you can create articles yourself.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

KGirl ^{(Wanna chat?)} 22:29, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Marian Dora has been accepted

Marian Dora, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. You may wish to consider registering an account so you can create articles yourself.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

KGirl ^{(Wanna chat?)} 14:23, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

September 2017

Hello, I'm Shellwood. I noticed that in this edit to Category:Literature related to the sexual revolution, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Shellwood (talk) 21:15, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Speedy deletion nomination of Debris documentar

A tag has been placed on Debris documentar requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Please review content. No indication of importance, verges on vandalism.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria 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 "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. Α Guy into Books™ § (Message) -  14:59, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

September 2017

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Debris documentar, a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Α Guy into Books™ § (Message) -  19:50, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please restore my article. I was out of home so I did not have time to contest your deletion and only saw it now. To reiterate: I translated it from the German equivalent Wiki, so, obviously, they did not have a problem vis-a-vis notability/importance over there (and I added references to reliable sources), plus, my article was approved here by another editor via the articles for creation apparatus. As for content: no, it was not vandalism. I realize the film's content is, to put it mildly, not everyone's cup of tea, yet, everything described in the text actually happened in the film. I have worked hard on this entry: Please reply ASAP. Here is what another editor wrote me over at deletion review: "Overturn and trout the deleting admin. The reason given in the deletion log was "Please review content. No indication of importance, verges on vandalism", which is what the tagger wrote. That kind of implies it was an A7 deletion, but the article was about a film and A7 does not apply to films. Even if A7 did apply to films the article cited a couple of sources which should have circumvented this. I don't remotely see how this could possibly be vandalism. Granted, the content of the film is obviously rather disgusting (it's about cannibalism), but that certainly doesn't make it vandalism." Three more editors came and argued for restoration since.--79.183.203.120 (talk) 20:26, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Debris documentar for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Debris documentar is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Debris documentar until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  Sandstein  12:29, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Please see my comment there.--79.183.203.120 (talk) 12:53, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

4 Months

Your edits here are disruptive. A second source that would be "secondary" in your eyes was added at your request; the third source is not wrong. That should be all required to avoid WP:CITEOVERKILL Ribbet32 (talk) 18:38, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Of the three sources, the only one explicitly stating it is an art film is the interview. Of the other two, one says the film's competitors are art films, the other, that it will be screened in arthouses.--79.183.203.120 (talk) 18:48, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

---