User talk:Coredesat/Archive 12
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Coredesat. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
Please Consider Restoring Page on Camp Quinebarge
Long time addict of Wiki, first time poster: the deletion of an important page led me to sign up and comment, so apologies if I overstep etiquette.
I am a former camper of Camp Q, now entering the nostalgia stage--and considering sending my own children. The cached version of the Wiki page was invaluable--and personal. Some of the names are familiar to alumni, and thus meaningful. While I can see how you might have considered the page an adverstisement, the information (especially about Monkeytown!) is definitely outside their "promotional literature."
For comparison, view: http://suisan.blogspot.com/2006/07/memories-of-monkeytown.html
Please consider restoring the Camp Quinebarge page: Camp Q is a full-on traditional summer camp, a dying breed (really, once you get, oh, 20-30 years perspective, the concept of traditional summer camp--and its extinction over liability concerns--becomes very, very important).
Thanks.
AnonymousBosh 12:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I see: "notability." Well, traditional camps really ARE dying out, hence the existence of *any* camp that remains is itself notable. (Seriously, many camps no longer allow CAMPFIRES...). Camp Q is notable in that it is *not* a "subject" camp, i.e., not a computer/soccer/math/etc. camp. Monkeytown, with its own currency (and huge inflation rates of, generally, 50% a year), is likely unique, and certainly notable as an example of something...lost. AnonymousBosh 12:52, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Ah, after more searching (and reading on this page), I doubt whether Camp Q will pass the notability test (except, of course, to alumni). I originally wrote because the reason for deletion was stated (somewhere) as "advertising," which the article definitely was not. However, given the "insufficient notability" hurdle, I can at least understand your point.
I appreciate Wikipedia for many of my research and network/linking needs. I could see Camp Q as an EXAMPLE of an article on, say, "Traditional Summer Camps" under the subsection "A Dying Breed?" Notability, at that point, will likely derive from its then-moniker, "Last of Its Kind."
Monkeytown, btw, really is the shizz. AnonymousBosh 20:50, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
ASUS products AfD
Hello there! Could you expand a bit on your rationale on closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of products manufactured by ASUS with "delete"? The nomination, and its supporters, made almost no supporting arguments as to how this list falls afoul of WP:NOT. Meanwhile, I see several very different arguments (including my own, of course) for keeping the list. There was not a single response or rebuttal to any of those arguments, while the people saying "keep" specifically addressed the nomination. Thanks, and happy editing! —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 05:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
- I closed as delete because the list was unlike the Nokia product list in that it was disorganized, contained no references or external links verifying the existence of the products on it, and was rather spammy. It might be better just to remake it from scratch, although if that happens I could undelete its history. --Coredesat 05:50, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, that sounds like a fairly reasonable strategy. Thanks for the quick response. —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 06:06, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm dropping it
This just seems to be one of those things that Chacor and I won't agree on. It's a no-win situation. Thegreatdr 15:47, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Junaid Sheikh
Hello I want to tell you that the article was about a notable personality and I don't think it should have been deleted.You may not be knowing the person but that doesn't mean you should delete some one's article.I kindly request you not to do it again in future. RegardsPrettyIndGal 05:32, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Nude celebrities
Hi, Coredesat. I'm not sure yet if there will be a problem with scripts and such that tally former FAs (I've pinged Raul654, Gimmetrow and RickBlock—Gimme and Rick run a lot of FA scripts), but I'm concerned that there *may* be issues with the loss of articlehistory on the talk page. As the closing admin, you might want to follow Wikipedia talk:Former featured articles#Nude celebrities just in case anything pops up. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:15, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Nude celebrities AfD
Could you please reconsider your closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nude celebrities on the Internet? Not only was there a sizeable number of keeps, but your reason for closure was based off of "WP:OR/WP:NPOV problems". Wouldn't it be preferable to rewrite the article rather than just delete it outright? --Hemlock Martinis 00:55, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
About an old speedy deletion
I noticed that you speedily deleted an article on Jack McCallum way back in November 2006. I'm not sure which Jack McCallum the article referred to, but there is a major American sportswriter with that name. He works for Sports Illustrated, and his recent book, Seven Seconds or Less, was widely reviewed in newspapers. Would you mind if I started a new article about Jack McCallum, the sportswriter? Zagalejo 21:07, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Old AfD
Hi there. I was just made an admin and I was experimenting with the new tools and poking around my deleted contributions when I noticed a deleted AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hentaipalm)that I had participated in back in March. It looks like you closed it as delete, but then deleted the AfD itself instead of the actual article. I'm not sure exactly what you want to do about that, but I just wanted to mention it because it seemed odd. -Chunky Rice 22:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 3rd, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 36 | 3 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 03:09, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly Episode 28
Good news, everyone: Wikipedia Weekly Episode 28 has been released!
.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/09/04/wikipedia-weekly-28/ and as always, you can download old episodes and more at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.
Please spread the word about Wikipedia Weekly, we're trying to spread the word so that people know about the project!
For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP 04:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.
Wikidpete 08:21, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I want to tell you that the article was about a group of people and you questioned it's notablilty. I don't think it should have been deleted as there has been this warning before, but it was found that there were many forms of notablity (e.g. forein tours) (check page history to confirm). I kindly wish that you inform me of how to correct this problem so that I can get my page back. The artical is called Hampshire County Youth Orchestra. Regards, Wikidpete 08:20, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
P.S. I have now found that you have "protected" my other articals from being created (Hampshire County Woodwind Orchestra) when the [{hangon}] tag was clearly displayed. I was going to edit that page and add "suitable content" this morning" . Can you please take into account international time zones before deleting pages. I am in the UK and my page was tagged at around 2:30 in the morning and deleted within 2 hours. Clearly I did not have any time to correct the fault before my page was lost. I request my page be put back online for a period of 24 hours so I can correct it. If there is no change within 24 hours, then you can delete it. Regards Wikidpete 08:35, 7 September 2007 (UTC)}
I request that these articals be put back online so that I can correct the problems that you are concerned about, as there has not been any problems with some of them for a considerable time:
03:53, 7 September 2007 Coredesat (Talk | contribs) deleted "Hampshire Specialist Music Course" (CSD A7, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hampshire Music Service)
03:50, 7 September 2007 Coredesat (Talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Hampshire County Youth Band" (CSD A7, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hampshire Music Service)
03:50, 7 September 2007 Coredesat (Talk | contribs) deleted "Hampshire County Youth Band" (CSD A7, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hampshire Music Service)
03:50, 7 September 2007 Coredesat (Talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Hampshire County Youth Orchestra" (CSD G8: Talkpage of non-Existent Article)
03:50, 7 September 2007 Coredesat (Talk | contribs) deleted "Hampshire County Youth Orchestra" (CSD A7, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hampshire Music Service)
03:49, 7 September 2007 Coredesat (Talk | contribs) deleted "Hampshire County Youth Woodwind Orchestra" (CSD A7, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hampshire Music Service)
03:48, 7 September 2007 Coredesat (Talk | contribs) deleted "Hampshire County Woodwind Orchestra" (CSD A7, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hampshire Music Service)
03:48, 7 September 2007 Coredesat (Talk | contribs) deleted "Hampshire Music Service" (CSD A7, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hampshire Music Service)
I understand that a lot of people write "junk" on wikipedia and clog it up with rubbish. I assure you that that is NOT my aim. I wish to establish myself with a few good articals on wikipedia about my music groups and other topics which I know a lot about, so that I can one day become an admin like yourself and benifit this project personaly.
Thank you.
Peter. Wikidpete 08:45, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Eleventyseven. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Chubbles 04:57, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Ron-Robert Zieler AfD
When correctly closing this AfD as "Delete", should the associated pages in the AfD for equally non-notable footballers also have been deleted? - fchd 05:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
I was typing and posting my point as you were closing. Up to you whether you remove it. Fiddle Faddle 08:37, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- Makes sense. I don't think it would have affected your decision either way. It was an interesting debate. What will be interesting now is whether all the instances applied by the bot stay or go, and whether the template wording or usage is altered by this discussion. Fiddle Faddle 08:43, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Greetings. Please review your deletion decision on this article. A 5-4 split (or even a 6-4 split) does not constitute consensus to delete. If anything, the AfD should be extended for further opinion. Cheers! bd2412 T 17:33, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- Why did you delete this article? There was 4 delete and 4 keep and the discussion had only been going for 5 days.--Southern Texas 21:23, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, I am still new here. How can I request that it be recreated.--Southern Texas 21:26, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Samuel Lincoln. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Southern Texas 21:49, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Undeletion Request: Article/Talk-Page; Andy Sherry (Martial Artist.)
Wotcher! Ok, this is in effect my fault, I hadn't read the rules for PROD's till today, so I thought my attempt at starting a contribution on the web page would count as an objection to deletion. I'll have a go at tweaking and adding sources, I have a "30 years of the KUGB" book here somewhere, and I can get the 40 year version aswell if needed for citing references. So, I'd like to have the current state of the articled undeleted so that I can have a starting point. I'm not going to argue on the "Notable Individual" front right now, just say that he's a notable individual within the Martial Art.
Thanks for your attention, Ferret-Simpson 19:58, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Help stop Afd
The Andy Sherry article is under attack and is likely to be deleted. Please help by posting your views on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Sherry. simonthebold 17:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 10th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 37 | 10 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 20:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Message about mass deletion nominations posted at AN/I
Hi,
An editor has suddenly nominated 45-50 "List of XXXX Americans" articles for deletion, which I think is problematic (that's not a euphemism). A statement you made in closing List of Portuguese Americans has been brought up by that editor. The situation seems so problematic to me that I posted a message I posted at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents see "Mass deletion nominations for List of [Ethnic Group X] Americans". You may want to follow that or comment there. I don't think either you or that editor did anything horrible, I just think this is working out well and AN/I seems to be the only place that could handle it.Noroton 01:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Sorry
My MIstake i thought i had updated evreything Jason Rees 11:41, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
A Shanty No Lemon
An editor has asked for a deletion review of A Shanty No Lemon. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Ironhide1975 00:55, 14 September 2007 (UTC) A major article about this show is now available here [1]
Images I uploaded
Thanks for the talk page advice. I was a confused over how to fill out the fair use rationale. I think I have it know. Thanks. User:calbear22 07:07, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Question on including Newspaper reference
I would like to add the following link to the Gwendolyn Zepeda article:
- Martin, Betty L. "Houston artists inspired by MECA to perform at 30th anniversary event" "Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle"
The Houston Chronicle has a Copyright notice for the author Betty Martin, do I need permission from the author or is the reference acceptable since I am including the Copyright notice in the original article?
Joolio12 03:17, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Devilz Candy
Hello Coredesat, I would like to know why the Devilz Candy article was deleted. I listed good reason why she was noteable, and that the article met wiki standards. Is there anyway this decision can be changed? Lucius Sempronius Turpio 03:55, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Sockpuppet Case
You might be intrested in this [2] as they are the sockpuppets on a account which you closed an AFD. ExtraDry 01:14, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 17th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 38 | 17 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 02:51, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
List of GUI testing tools
I think the article "List of GUI testing tools" shouldn't been deleted for following reasons,
- There are number of articles link to it.
- The article is not just a collection of the links to external website. The list also have some links to other wikipedia articles, and the external links can gradually change when the corresponding wikipedia article has been created.
--Ans 12:44, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Actually, this was a linkfarm; an article having any number of incoming links doesn't make it immune to deletion, and the article consisted almost entirely of external links - Wikipedia is not a directory. An article on this subject could exist, but not in the form it had when it was deleted. --Coredesat 22:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- When someone later rewrite it into an appropriate form, all of its deleted revisions can be undeleted? (Wikipedia:Deletion_review#History-only_undeletion) --Ans 04:51, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
EODMC
I noticed a page had been deleted stating "(CSD A7 - no assertion of notability (ORG))" What do I need to do to satisfy this requirment in order to have a page detailing factual points of interest about this club? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DefusingDanger (talk • contribs) 19:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Contents
I've asked in a number of places for comments to be given at Wikipedia talk:Contents#Contents pages, and lists of lists. I just saw the oldAfD tag added to List of overviews, so figure you are probably interested! If you can get this the attention it needs, do so (ANI notice? dunno. I've tried VP, RfC, and CBB already. I'll try the mailing lists if there isnt consensus in some direction within the month.) So it goes. --Quiddity 22:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC) (sorry, running out door and have 5 things in head and saw tag and rush read/edited and, breathe. back soon, will deal with then :)
Just noticed you blanked Fat cat instead of deleting it outright. You're more experienced at this stuff than me, so thought I'd ask if there was a reason you did it this way. Thanks - Raymond Arritt 17:01, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 24th, 2007.
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 39 | 24 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 01:52, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
I reverted your changes, as the darker color makes the text on the template difficult to read and the image you chose to replace the one already there is horribly distorted. Get consensus for any changes first. --Coredesat 23:11, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- I changed the image because it is bad form to repeat within the same article. Please explain what is "horribly distorted" about the new one. Can you find another alternative?
- When I changed the colors I was looking for ones that fit with the ones already used in some of the tables. I have a very dark display and I have no problem seeing them. The new ones were actually brighter than the old, but if you cannot see then I will leave it.
- As for consensus, you cannot ask for it on very minor details here because few will care enough to provide feedback. I suggest that you or someone else write a manual of style for the articles so the details can be picked out and debated. Good kitty 22:16, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly Episode 31
Oh, boy! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 31 has been released!
.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/09/26/wikipedia-weekly-31-return-of-the-panel/ and as always, you can download old episodes and more at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.
Please spread the word about Wikipedia Weekly. We're trying to spread the word so that people know about the project!
For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP 02:44, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.
9/21 Toni Preckwinkle DRV
You noted that deletion was endorsed and page was protected. I am not sure what it means to have a page protected, but recreation will likely be the WP:CHICOTW in a week and a half. What will I need to do?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 18:28, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
- O.K. What does it mean to have a page unsalted?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:18, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
- You can see that the WP:CHICOTW has a pretty good track record of achieving its objective of contributing to the project with newly created articles. This week is likely to be the 8th consecutive and 18 of 19 WP:DYKs. Is it possible to have the page unsalted immediately or at the commencement of the WP:CO so that we can create a WP:DYK eligible article?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 14:31, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Regarding image
the Image:Invisionpowerboarddefaultinstall.jpg is not orphaned, it's used in the Invision Power Board article Francinne 12:21, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Deletion
Hi Coredesat- I noticed that you deleted "Womens Organization for National Prohibition Reform" for alleged copyright violation. Because I created that entry from my website, to whch I hold copyright, I don't believe the entry is in violation. Please advise and thanks for your help.David Justin 19:03, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 03, 2007
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 40 | 1 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Actually, this was a linkfarm; an article having any number of incoming links doesn't make it immune to deletion, and the article consisted almost entirely of external links - Wikipedia is not a directory. An article on this subject could exist, but not in the form it had when it was deleted. --Coredesat 22:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- When someone later rewrite it into an appropriate form, all of its deleted revisions can be undeleted? (Wikipedia:Deletion_review#History-only_undeletion) --Ans 04:51, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- Sure, I can do that. --Coredesat 11:05, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
- But, before that, those old revisions won't be deleted from database? --Ans 16:38, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
- Sure, I can do that. --Coredesat 11:05, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
More prediction stuff
I have to leave now so I will add this here. Now an article has been created. Tropical Depression Three 2008. ---CWY2190TC 11:45, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
For your barn
Wikipedia Weekly Episode 32
Great news! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 32 has been released!
.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/10/09/episode-32-trust-me/, and, as always, you can download past episodes and leave comments at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.
For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP 08:39, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.
Digitally Imported
Why did you overturn the AfD for Digitally Imported???? That makes no sense at all.--NightRider63 19:31, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Well-deserved
|
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
| For dedicated service to encyclopedia in the performance of tiresome administrative tasks with a thoughtful and thorough demeanor, Coredesat has earned the admiration of everyone, and this Barnstar of Diligence. Xoloz 13:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC) |
Wikipedia Weekly
A couple new episodes - we're posting the infobox to save duplicating info.
Subscription · Feedback
For the podcast crew -- Tawkerbot 20:35, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Following the decision to delete these userboxes, I removed one from User:Biofoundationsoflanguage userpage, which was coded on the page rather then using the template link, He has now restored the userbox again, can you sort this out.--Padraig 15:54, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- Rubbish. It's a different userbox. Biofoundationsoflanguage 17:06, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- Is it, you made the alteration here after the template was put up for deletion, I ask you why on the Mfd.--Padraig 18:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- I see User:Beano_ni has restored the userbox again on his userpage. They seem determined to ignore the Mfd ruling.--Padraig 13:22, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
- Actually he has recreated the template User:Beano_ni/UserBoxes/NIFlagInWiki.--Padraig 13:25, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
- User:Setanta747 has coded the userbox on his user page, I deleted it but he restored it again.--Padraig 11:16, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- He has restored it again after you removed it.--Padraig 23:51, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- Again again he seems to think WP policies don't apply to him.--Padraig 00:31, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
SPAs pushing POV, PR, and advertising on the Chapman_University_School_of_Law Page
Hi again. You were very helpful a few weeks ago interceding against a PR-pushing vandal on the Marshall Sylver page. We now have a similar situation occurring on the Chapman University School of Law page. For several months, a few anon IPS have been removing sourced info from U.S. News and World Report, indicating that Chapman ranks in the lowest tier of American law schools [3][4] [5]. The result has been a rather tiresome edit war. Most likely, these reversions are coming from Chapman U. itself. (See the next paragraph for the reason why.)
A few days ago, one barely used account, Hyperion357 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and one brand-new account, Usajax (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), began to escalate the edit war by filling the page with advertising from Chapman's website. [6] [7]. One of the vandals, "Hyperion357," claims on the Talk Page that he has "received permission" from the university to use its ad campaign on the article page. It's pretty clear what's going on here: Somebody from Chapman is attempting to scrub sourced info from the page, and paper it over with PR. I'd appreciate any help you could provide. Thanks. --Eleemosynary 03:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Speedy deleted as CSD A7. However, since the article had survived a deletion debate before, on no account should it constitute an item for speedy deletion. This article would be more liable for a DRV or a 2nd AfD, though. Could you please take a look at the page again when you have some time? Regards, PeaceNT 03:39, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for restoring the page. I've removed all the unsourced material. Do you think it makes a fine stub now? PeaceNT 05:06, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
DRV Notice
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Enquiring Minds. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- Jreferee t/c 19:58, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 42 | 15 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I see that you closed as "delete" List of Jewish American musicians. I want to make sure that you did the right thing and replaced every individual in that article in the proper category (as was recommended in the discussion), so that this information is not lost to our users. Thank you, Badagnani 00:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
As I had predicted (and has been my observation of nearly all delete closers), you did not do the right thing. Please do the right thing, as our users are the ones who suffer when you take the easy route. As I mentioned, it was proposed to replace every individual in that article in the proper category. You chose not to do that. It's never too late to do the right thing, however. Thanks very much. Badagnani 02:22, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
That is unacceptable. Whenever this happens, the deleting admin always gives the same answer: "But it would be too hard and take too much time to do that!" That is correct, but you are the one who deleted, now you really do need to take the responsibility for your action and do the right thing: go through each article in the deleted list and make certain that the proper category is there. To not do so does a grave disservice to our users (whose interests I assumed you had in mind in doing the tasks you do here). Please show that you can and will live up to the responsibilities you took on when you were given the tools. Thank you again. Badagnani 02:36, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Origin of religion
Well I still think the tag you used is incorrect, because it gives a link to the history of the article after it was deleted and not before. Furthermore the tag provides no link to the specific article. Wikipedia:Deletion review states If you are proposing that a page be reconsidered for deletion, please place the template {{Delrev}} on that page to inform editors who may wish to join the discussion here. So I do not understand how the tag is wrong one, when this is what wikipedia says. I cannot dream that it is the wrong tag, I have to go by the guidelines. Muntuwandi 05:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Enforcing a tag and protecting the article feels like bullying. As far as I was concerned I followed wikipedia guidelines. Unless wikipedia changes its guidelines on the Wikipedia:Deletion review page for everyone to see. It is unfair for me to go by your word alone.Muntuwandi 06:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- I am requesting the restoration of the history of the talk page as well. There is considerable discussion that has been lost. Muntuwandi 22:59, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- Enforcing a tag and protecting the article feels like bullying. As far as I was concerned I followed wikipedia guidelines. Unless wikipedia changes its guidelines on the Wikipedia:Deletion review page for everyone to see. It is unfair for me to go by your word alone.Muntuwandi 06:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)