User talk:AustralianTraveller

g'day!

Welcome!

Hello AustralianTraveller, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page.

By the way, I'm going to take a punt in the dark and say you're Australian. If so, excellent! Aussies make good Wikipedians (yes, oh yes, we do). You may be interested in Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board, where Australian Wikipedians occasionally meet to try to help coordinate our efforts. Again, welcome! fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 06:08, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ansearch

Please stop removing the section discussing 1000 domains removed... in the above article. —Moondyne 21:43, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How is an article from Zdnet which provides more information of the company irrelevant? I am not adding spam, I am adding a properly referenced news item. Reverting. —Moondyne 21:50, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion of ZDNet. Where's the information from AUDA.org.au? If this actually happened as stated there should be an AUDA release on this? AustralianTraveller 22:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Come off it. ZDNet is a credible news source. Why are you wanting to remove content which might paint Ansearch in a bad light? Do you have a conflict of interest? If so, you should be aware of our policy at WP:COI? —Moondyne 22:07, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have been to AUDA's website to find information in regards to why there domain names were removed. However there is no information there. An article and promotion of Renai Lemai is irrelevant and unless you can provide a reference from AUDA i'd suggest you stop adding spam links AustralianTraveller 21:46, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Promotion of ZDNet. Where's the information from AUDA.org.au? If this actually happened as stated there should be an AUDA release on this? AustralianTraveller 22:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

So you are saying that the press and the stories in it are reliable? Come off it mate. Find a reference to the information from AUDA.. I'm looking for one and can't find one. I don't care if the information stays there. ZDNET promotion and unverifiable content is a breech of policy. Encyclopedic content must be verifiable.. AustralianTraveller 22:10, 25 February 2007 (UTC) AustralianTraveller 22:42, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than clutter both of our talk pages any further, I have replied at talk:Ansearch. —Moondyne 23:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea! AustralianTraveller 02:48, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Planet search

A tag has been placed on Planet search, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because it is an article about a certain website, blog, forum, or other web content that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles, as well as notability guidelines for websites. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on Talk:Planet search. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Thanks. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 04:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ansearch for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ansearch 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/Ansearch 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. TimothyJosephWood 19:20, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]