| Revision as of 15:45, 16 February 2011 editTarc (talk | contribs)24,217 edits Issue has been replied to and settled← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:47, 16 February 2011 edit undoScottdrink (talk | contribs)140 edits Proposed deletion of Mut@ge.Mix@ge. (TW)Next edit → | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
| :: The issue, then, is whether the closing administrator will understand your "week keep". By the way, I expanded and referenced ], a related AfD. Thanks. ] (]) 17:26, 14 February 2011 (UTC) | :: The issue, then, is whether the closing administrator will understand your "week keep". By the way, I expanded and referenced ], a related AfD. Thanks. ] (]) 17:26, 14 February 2011 (UTC) | ||
| :::As long as we don't get an admin from the much-derided ] crew, I trust a closing admin's general ability to close AfDs accurately. As for Palmer, no, you just can't squeeze that much blood from a stone. More sources talking about the same issue doesn't make the issue go away. All he is known for is being a victim of a tragedy. ] (]) 17:58, 14 February 2011 (UTC) | :::As long as we don't get an admin from the much-derided ] crew, I trust a closing admin's general ability to close AfDs accurately. As for Palmer, no, you just can't squeeze that much blood from a stone. More sources talking about the same issue doesn't make the issue go away. All he is known for is being a victim of a tragedy. ] (]) 17:58, 14 February 2011 (UTC) | ||
| ==] of ]== | |||
| ] | |||
| The article ] has been ]  because of the following concern: | |||
| :'''Unreferenced article about a non-notable collection of music. Does not pass ].''' | |||
| While all contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, content or articles may be ]. | |||
| You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ]. | |||
| Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. The ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:PRODWarning --> ] (]) 20:47, 16 February 2011 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:47, 16 February 2011
Meh?
Hello, There is plenty of material in reliable sources available to expand the article about William M. Feehan into a decent biography. That can't happen, though, if the article is deleted. Cullen328 (talk) 15:52, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, "meh". You can interpret my opinion there as a "weak keep", i.e. the article subject may meet the notability guidelines, but it isn't exactly a barn-burner. Tarc (talk) 15:55, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
- The issue, then, is whether the closing administrator will understand your "week keep". By the way, I expanded and referenced Orio Palmer, a related AfD. Thanks. Cullen328 (talk) 17:26, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
- As long as we don't get an admin from the much-derided WP:ARS crew, I trust a closing admin's general ability to close AfDs accurately. As for Palmer, no, you just can't squeeze that much blood from a stone. More sources talking about the same issue doesn't make the issue go away. All he is known for is being a victim of a tragedy. Tarc (talk) 17:58, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
- The issue, then, is whether the closing administrator will understand your "week keep". By the way, I expanded and referenced Orio Palmer, a related AfD. Thanks. Cullen328 (talk) 17:26, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Mut@ge.Mix@ge
The article Mut@ge.Mix@ge has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Unreferenced article about a non-notable collection of music. Does not pass WP:NALBUMS.
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 {{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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Scottdrink (talk) 20:47, 16 February 2011 (UTC)