Revision as of 00:26, 5 September 2006 editRossami (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users25,096 edits →Merge← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:30, 5 September 2006 edit undoKeegan (talk | contribs)Administrators15,573 edits →question for any admin who knows the answer: dakota is rightNext edit → | ||
Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
Unsure, but if the article was oversighted it would not show.--] 05:45, 12 August 2006 (UTC) | Unsure, but if the article was oversighted it would not show.--] 05:45, 12 August 2006 (UTC) | ||
*Dakota is correct. Oversight can perminantly hide revisions from administrators in the case of libel or revelation of personal information. Administrators will not know if a revision is hidden. ]<sup><small> (])</small></sup> 01:30, 5 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
==Question moved from top of page== | ==Question moved from top of page== |
Revision as of 01:30, 5 September 2006
Misplaced Pages:Advertising as a Speedy Deletion Category
I have created a proposal for a new speedy deletion category. Please read it and comment on it (preferably on its talk page, not here.) Grandmasterka 21:56, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Neologisms as a Speedy Deletion Category
I have also created a proposal for a new speedy deletion category. Feel free to read it and comment on it either here, or on its talk page. J.J.Sagnella dated 22:34, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Question
I see a user creating a lot of pages about the songs of some non-notable band. These are candidates for speedy, right? --waffle iron 18:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Updating through the backlog
I've done some but it's nearly 3.30am and I have to be up for work in the morning! I'll do the rest next time I'm online. -- Francs2000 02:23, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- Done. I've also removed any listings that were placed on this page: listings belong on the main page, not the talk page. -- Francs2000 23:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Tagged for cleanup
The speedy deletions page has been messed up by a few bad edits, and needs some cleanup attention today.
Really, the list of speedy deletions and the policy should be on different pages to avoid problems like this. --John Nagle 17:30, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Deletion of Redirects
On 22-May, two examples were added to the Deletion of Redirects section. These examples do not meet the speedy deletion criteria for redirects. I've removed them and placed a comment regarding criteria and RFD instead. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 14:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
question for any admin who knows the answer
can something be speedily-deleted and not reflected in the deletion log? WɔlkUnseen 19:46, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- Any deletions of pages, images, or revisions should show up in the deletion log. — TheKMan 19:59, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- gracias. WɔlkUnseen 20:04, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Unsure, but if the article was oversighted it would not show.--Dakota 05:45, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- Dakota is correct. Oversight can perminantly hide revisions from administrators in the case of libel or revelation of personal information. Administrators will not know if a revision is hidden. Teke 01:30, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Question moved from top of page
Why was my edit listing speedy deletion tags deleted? I finally found the list of all tags and since it took me a while to get there ive been posting relevant tags on all pages (Weasel on weasel, afd on afd, speedy deletion on speedy deletion, etc.) I seem to keep getting reverted, possibly some think that i am trying to take the tag's action? (Speedily deleting the page about speedy deletions, saying that there are weasel words in weasel words, etc.? Just to clearify, this is not the intent, this is meant to make the tags handy for any who need them w/o having to hunt down the tag page. :) Thanks, 72.197.2.40 07:45, 10 June 2006 (UTC) moved by · rodii · 16:15, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- As for the answer... when you added those tags, the effect was not to list them on the page as you might have thought. Instead you listed the page for speedy deletion in every category you listed. There were nine different speedy deletion templates at the top of the page. And the content you wanted to add is already on the page. · rodii · 16:21, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
removing tags
If I place a speedy tag on a page, and then the creator makes substantial changes so the page no longer meets the speedy criteria, can I simply remove the tag before it gets reviewed by an administrater? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.29.141.11 (talk • contribs)
- certainly, but I would recommend instead of just removing the tag, replacing the speedy with a {{prod}} and whatever other tags it might need, based on what the speedy tag was for... - Adolphus79 16:43, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Coandă effect movies
The Coandă effect movies is suggested for speedy deletion. I agree that if it is only a suggestion in the sense of overall experiment it should be deleted. However 'suggestion' only refers to the content and the layout of the page. It is actually a very good thing to separate moving images from article pages as they are mostly very distracting, thus motivating a subpage. --Profero 11:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Don't delete Ultimate Improv!
It is a highly notable comedy trooop, founded by a very famous celebrity, JD Walsh.
Bert Flugelman, please do not delete
In process of developing it tomorrow. Frances76 12:27, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Visible From Space: please do not delete
The band Visible From Space meets these two criteria for importance/significance of a band: Has been featured in multiple non-trivial published works in reliable and reputable media (excludes things like school newspapers, personal blogs, etc...). Mention in Rolling Stone and The Village Voice, both of which will be noted in this wiki article
Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable; note that it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects, early bands and such. Judd Harris, the lead singer, was a semi-finalist (the 11th place male) American Idol. Since the band he is in is receiving national (U.S.) recognition, it seemed appropriate for the band to have its own article.
I'm not sure how to assert that I am not associated with the band in any way except to say: I am not associated with the band in any way other than enjoying their music.
I had planned to use multiple saves in making this article, as my web browser and net connection are not the most reliable and I would hate to work for an hour before saving and then lose all my work. I have added the stub tag and plan to continue working on the article throughout the day today and tomorrow. Darwin's Pug 11:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Pro-Pain-Pro-Wrestling
Please don't delete this page! It does contain information and will definately grow! *Sam**Sam*
we just want to get the word out
I want my article about my band Viekis to be there in case anyone looking for something good to listen to they can find us on this website — Preceding unsigned comment added by Viekis (talk • contribs)
- If you're trying to avoid getting speedily deleted, you've chosen almost exactly the wrong approach. In Misplaced Pages terms, "We just want to get the word out" == advertising, and "my band" == Vanity. The idea is that you get on Misplaced Pages after you've already successfully gotten the word out and established notability. It's not supposed to work the other way around. Kickaha Ota 04:01, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Crusade (album)
Please do not delete Crusade (album). If album covers are fair use, surely non plagiarized articles are fair use! --Alcuin 01:10, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Vanity articles on internet meme's that dont establish notability
Do articles on minor Internet memes (like this one: You Can't Help But Watch) qualify? I added {{prod}} since I was not sure if speedy was appropriate. The article makes some vague claims of some catch phrase "fast becoming iconic" on the net but there are no sources. Dalf | Talk 00:56, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
- Oh and the user who created it seems to have been banned after only a handfull of edits most or all of which look like vandalism. Dalf | Talk 00:57, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I agree that it's not-notable - but that's not a criterion for CSD. nn-bio is, but it's not a bio. It *is* verifiable, so not nonsense/empty. I think prod was the right step --- if that doesn't work then the Afd process is the next step. Brian 01:05, 25 July 2006 (UTC)btball
- I was afraid of that, though with the orginator banned I suspect the prod might work. Dalf | Talk 01:47, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I agree that it's not-notable - but that's not a criterion for CSD. nn-bio is, but it's not a bio. It *is* verifiable, so not nonsense/empty. I think prod was the right step --- if that doesn't work then the Afd process is the next step. Brian 01:05, 25 July 2006 (UTC)btball
In Death Characters
This doesn't seem to fit the criteria, although it's very stubbish at the moment, consisting mostly of a list of names. exolon 22:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
{{Firstarticle}}
Perhaps we could inlcude this template in the instructiond for listing an article for speedy deletion (ie to say that the marker should leave the template, subst'd, on the main contributor's talk page (where the contrib. is one of the user's first - you can tell this by the fact that their talk page will be empty)). Just an idea for avoiding "biting the newbies"! Martinp23 21:30, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Merge
This page is only a few paragraphs long since it doesn't list candidates anymore. I understand the historical reasons for listing the criteria on a separate page, but in its current form this page seems irrelevant and confusing. Gareth Aus 05:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
- If a merge is justified (and I'm not yet convinced that it is), the merger should be in the other direction. WP:CSD is by far the more widely referenced and linked page. Rossami (talk) 00:26, 5 September 2006 (UTC)