Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:07, 8 February 2010

Sylvia Ratonel

Thanks for your constructive feedback on the abovementioned article.Woodsman18 (talk) 12:13, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Shirogane Tunnel

See Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Shirogane tunnel. Fences&Windows 23:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Cricut

Please remove the speedy-deletion template from Cricut. CSD G11 does not apply here; I don't see how this stub about a commercial product could be considered "exclusively promotional". - Brian Kendig (talk) 02:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

The Lost & Found (band)

Uh, why are going to delete an article that I created that makes good sense? Please tell me why. Thanks. Robert LeBlanc (talk) 02:47, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect CSD tagging

Hello,

I came across Talk:What is the age of lady gaga, which you tagged as G1 (patent nonsense). The page's content was "what is lady gaga's age". This is very comprehensible and not patent nonsense. I've deleted the page under G8, which is more appropriate. You may want to look at WP:WIHS#G1 for an explanation of G1, with examples. Shubinator (talk) 04:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads-up. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 04:39, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

CSD-tag Idahan

Actually, this is not vandalism. I'm gonna make it a redirect to Ida'an. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 06:17, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. It was full of crap before someone whittled it down to that one sentence, which is why I had attached db-vandalism to it. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 06:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

btw...

You need to notify people when you tag their "creations", no matter how ridiculous they are. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 06:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Takes too long :P Just kidding. OK, will start doing so from next edit. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 06:27, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

That's so we can keep a record of "repeat-offenders," see? :) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 06:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Alice Pung

I have removed your prod tag from this article, because she clearly is notable; winner of an industry award, multiple interviews by reliable sources and notable books. I note that you have several messages above which query your deletion tags; I would suggest reviewing the relevant policy and taking it more slowly in future. Ironholds (talk) 06:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Ditto with Green Brigade; it isn't nonsense as defined in the speedy deletion guidelines. db-club would have been more appropriate; please make sure you understand the relevant guidelines before tagging articles. Ironholds (talk) 06:32, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

You could make sense of what he wrote? Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 06:33, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, fairly easily. The article was quite clearly about a group of football fans. Ironholds (talk) 07:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 07:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

SchuminWeb (Talk) 07:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

SchuminWeb (Talk) 07:17, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tagging

Hi Simon-in-sagamihara, just FYI, when you mark a page for speedy deletion, as you did with Syed Umair Javed and Vincent kalina, could you please leave an appropriate Edit summary and notify the page creator about it? If you use a tool like Twinkle it'll do both automatically. Thanks—  Glenfarclas  (talk) 07:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Yep, no problem. Another admin admonished me about that, I think those two articles you mentioned are from before that. I haven't used any of the tools before but I'll give that one your mentioned a try tonight. Thanks for the heads-up. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 07:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate it. For one thing, I think you'll find that notifying authors will actually reduce how often they remove speedy tags; if a strange tag shows up with no explanation people are more inclined to just delete it. Twinkle is easy to use, doesn't require downloading anything, and does a good job 95% of the time (sometimes it craps out halfway through applying a tag). Happy hunting—  Glenfarclas  (talk) 07:41, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Peter Pee Silvester

The article Peter Pee Silvester has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non-notable and totally unreferenced BLP

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

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ridernyc (talk) 13:57, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Take care when warning people of speedy deletion messages. I did not create the sir henry rickard article. Deb (talk) 18:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)