Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:19, 10 February 2010

Shaun Garea

Re:Deletion. Yes Im sorry this was my first page and I dont want to mess it up so please just delete it if it is not right. I did it as I like his work here and see him at shows and just took stuff off his websites, not the most computer savvy ;-( A quick deletion would be best then. I was going to do similar articles on other notable artists in my hometown but after reading more info about 'notability' Ill leave it alone. Thanks Artfan21 —Preceding undated comment added 22:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC).

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)

Junders Plunkett

Not a hoax, but a fictional character. Bearian (talk) 02:34, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Another incorrect usage of CSD G1

Hello there. Please keep in mind (as a previous editor has pointed out above) that CSD G1 is to be used for patent nonsense only. That means pages which are literally gibberish (like "woirehfaoewihfaoiweuaiwehf" for example). You recently tagged Cocprincipe y los wilsons as G1. It was an article written in Spanish about a non-notable band. For those of us who understand Spanish, tagging it as A7 (as a band with no claim of notability) would be appropriate, however G1 says specifically in the section that it does not apply to articles solely because they are written in a foreign language. Unless someone who understands the language makes the determination that it qualifies under another CSD section, pages you come across in another language should be brought to WP:NOTENGLISH. Thanks, --Nick—/_Contribs 02:59, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Gotcha. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 03:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

And yet another incorrect usage of CSD A-7?

Here's your frickun source. Good night and au revoir. Fruit.Smoothie (talk) 06:34, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

FYI, now at AfD.  Glenfarclas  (talk) 08:22, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

More CSD

Although I don't want to jump on the seeming CSD bandwagon, I felt like giving you a friendly reminder: When you see cases like this, it's generally best to wait for a bit and see if the user intends to request deletion, as they did on Central Community Historical Society Museum. I would also suggest that you don't use Twinkle for re-adding CSD tags (or at least turn off the notification option), as receiving several deletion notices for the same iteration of an article can come across as a bit bitey. Happy editing. —LedgendGamer 06:42, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Gotcha. As for that edit you mentioned, the author hadn't blanked it when I re-added the CSD (or else yeah, I would have just put the author-requested tag on there.) I'll make sure to turn off notification on Twinkle. Thanks for your input. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 06:44, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Prod procedure

It is acceptable to remove a PROD tag. See WP:CONTESTED. If a PROD tag is removed, the procedure is not to readd the tag, but to take it to AFD, which I have done. THF (talk) 07:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The bot reverted the removal, not me. I know it's OK to remove PROD tags. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 07:39, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I must have misunderstood this edit summary. My apologies. THF (talk) 09:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, no problem. I don't really get it myself. It's not my bot or anything - why would the bot change be attributed to me? The plot thickens. *puts on tinfoil hat* Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 09:07, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Lorry hijacking

What makes you think that the lorry hijacking article is a hoax? A moment's Googling shows that this is a real crime. -- The Anome (talk) 09:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The article is clearly not a dictionary definition. Truck hijacking is a well-known class of theft-with-violence, with a variety of well-known techniques, some of which are mentioned here. -- The Anome (talk) 09:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Are you for real? This is just a subset of carjacking. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 09:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I am for real, and no, it's not. In the case of carjacking, the aim is to steal the car itself (as the name suggests). In the case of lorry hijacking, it's to steal the load. Carjacking is often an opportunistic crime carried out by individuals; truck hijacking is generally carried out by criminal gangs, who need to be able to handle a full truckload of stuff and then fence it. -- The Anome (talk) 09:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

By the way, regarding your two attempts to remove it: "hoax" and "dicdef" are surely mutually exclusive? WP:DONTLIKEIT is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. -- The Anome (talk) 09:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

All right already, quit your sperging. One can change one's mind, you know. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 09:54, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

More CSD

Hi. I declined your A7 tagging of My Heart, Your Hands because A7 applies to "an article about a band, singer, musician, or musical ensemble", which this was about a song. A PROD of AfD nomination might be more appropriate.

Since you've been getting a lot of CSD tags declined, I'd recommend perhaps taking things a bit more slowly while you fully familiarise yourself with the details of the criteria. I'm not saying this to be critical, but to help you avoid future disputed tags and wasted time, since you also seem to be doing perfectly good CSD taggings too. If you're at all interested I'd be happy to go through some CSD criteria with you and give you a hand with getting the tags right the first time in future. Cheers, Olaf Davis (talk) 17:47, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Linkin park under attack

Hey! I see you tagged Linkin park under attack for speedy deletion under criterion G3. A fake album/fan album is still a recording, so I don't think this is the type of hoax that can be deleted under G3. Have you evidence that the article was created in bad faith? —C.Fred (talk) 01:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

"Fake album" means "fan album"? What kind of crazy language is this? :) I interpreted "fake album" as "imaginary album". Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 01:29, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Tagging of Perth Blitz

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Perth Blitz. I do not think that Perth Blitz fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because that they have made the Gridiron playoffs nearly every year and the Grand Final twice is a reasonable assertion of notability, though it may not be sufficient for inclusion. I request that you consider not re-tagging Perth Blitz for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. You are, of course, free to tag the article with {{prod}} or nominate it at WP:AFD.

Please review the criteria for speedy deletion to get a fuller understanding of some of the criteria. Note that criterion A7 does not require a notable subject, and does not attempt to judge notability, it merely requires a credible assertion of notability. Thanks for your work patrolling new pages though! Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 02:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)