User talk:Tarheelz123

RfD nomination of Christ Michael

Articles for deletion nomination of Michael Prinz von Anhalt

I have nominated Michael Prinz von Anhalt, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Prinz von Anhalt. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. JBFrenchhorn (talk) 07:03, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Kylie Jenner

A tag has been placed on Kylie Jenner requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:12, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Endeavor lion logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Endeavor lion logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:55, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bisexual models

Category:Bisexual models, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. KarlB (talk) 03:29, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Canadian Football League Cheerleading

The article Canadian Football League Cheerleading has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There is no such thing as a CFL Cheerleading League. This is simply a list of CFL team Cheerleaders and could easily be merged into the respective team articles.

While all 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. Dbrodbeck (talk) 19:59, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Canadian Football League Cheerleading for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Canadian Football League Cheerleading 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/Canadian Football League Cheerleading 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 template from the top of the article. Dbrodbeck (talk) 20:04, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of National Basketball Association Cheerleading for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article National Basketball Association Cheerleading 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/National Basketball Association Cheerleading 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 template from the top of the article. Dbrodbeck (talk) 20:22, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kylie Jenner for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kylie Jenner 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/Kylie Jenner (2nd nomination) 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. LADY LOTUS • TALK 12:48, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of St. Mark's United Methodist Church

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 St. Mark's United Methodist Church, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It appears to be a clear copyright infringement of https://web.archive.org/web/20090827142749/http://www.stmarksraleigh.org/content/about/about-st-marks/history-of-st-marks/. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. However, even if you use one of these processes to release copyrighted material to Wikipedia, it still needs to comply with the other policies and guidelines to be eligible for inclusion. If you would like any assistance with this, you can ask a question at the help desk.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 19:05, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of St. Philip Lutheran Church

The article St. Philip Lutheran Church has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable church. Creator was later banned for sockpuppetry and copyright evasion so the bulk of the article - which was written by the page creator - is suspected of being a WP:COPYVIO. Recommend deleting the "church history" section in particular if the page is WP:REFUNDed.

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. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 19:15, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Edenton United Methodist Church

The article Edenton United Methodist Church has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Local church which does not meet WP:CORP. Arguably WP:A7-eligible.

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. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:41, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lord of Love listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Lord of Love. Since you had some involvement with the Lord of Love redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:31, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Draft:Conrad Hughes Hilton III

Draft:Conrad Hughes Hilton III, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Conrad Hughes Hilton III and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Conrad Hughes Hilton III during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 18:10, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Camilla listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Lady Camilla. Since you had some involvement with the Lady Camilla redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. CookieMonster755 ✉ 05:11, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Christ Holy listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Christ Holy. Since you had some involvement with the Christ Holy redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. — the Man in Question (in question) 23:36, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of North Raleigh United Methodist Church for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article North Raleigh United Methodist Church 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/North Raleigh United Methodist Church until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 until the discussion has finished.

Random person no 362478479 (talk) 14:02, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]