User talk:SeanCollins

The love that dare not speak its name

The love that dare not speak its name is my first contribution. It existed before, as a redirect to homosexuality. It no longer contains a direct reference to homosexuality, but such a meaning might easily be inferred from the articles Lord Alfred Douglas and Oscar Wilde. The text of the poem alone does not make me think that the other Love is homosexual alone. Oscar Wilde's response to the question begs the interpretation that the other Love is any that does not fit into a socially acceptable category. Homosexuality is (and was) not the only one.

I have seen [a talk page] that uses "the love that dare not speak its name" as a euphemism for homosexuality, and [another talk page] that may only be suggesting "unnatural love". The euphemism is clear in Robertson Davies' quote on 1970s. Perhaps some sort of reference to its use as a euphemism should be included, but I'm still wary of suggesting that 'homosexuality' is its only meaning.

Please explain why you found it necessary to delete a whole block of criticism on the TM_Net page?

The 20 December version by Zomgbratto had the criticisms and your edit on 22nd of December removed that, why? Please stop your blatant vandalism.

Please sign your edits. The criticism section is pure speculation on the part of dissatisfied TMNet customers, wikipedia isn't the place for it. If you can find something of encyclopaedic value in the removed section, then say what you think it is: if I agree, I won't delete it.SeanCollins (talk) 19:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated The love that dare not speak its name for deletion, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The love that dare not speak its name in case of interest. – sgeureka ^t•c 14:51, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Datuk M. Kayveas listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Datuk M. Kayveas. Since you had some involvement with the Datuk M. Kayveas redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Alexander Iskandar (talk) 04:40, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of TIME Internet

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on TIME Internet, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. 331dot (talk) 19:42, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of TIMENet

The article TIMENet has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable ISP. Unreferenced since December 2007.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 17:09, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]