| Revision as of 12:42, 19 September 2006 editNo more bongos (talk | contribs)561 edits De-Prodding etc← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:14, 19 September 2006 edit undoKappa (talk | contribs)36,858 edits →De-Prodding etcNext edit → | ||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
| Hi, just a quick request to be more specific with your reasons for de-prodding in various music related articles. Particularly, it's a bit confusing to see ] as a reason to de-PROD when an article clearly makes no attempt to assert that it meets the requirements. Thanks... (] 12:42, 19 September 2006 (UTC)) | Hi, just a quick request to be more specific with your reasons for de-prodding in various music related articles. Particularly, it's a bit confusing to see ] as a reason to de-PROD when an article clearly makes no attempt to assert that it meets the requirements. Thanks... (] 12:42, 19 September 2006 (UTC)) | ||
| *Do you want to be more specific here? ] 15:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:14, 19 September 2006
- I will generally but not always reply here. If I talked to you, I will be watching your talk page so you can reply there if you wish.
Previous discussions: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6
Broom (clean)
Hi. Before you deprod things like Broom (clean) please do some research and please assume that the prod tag was put up by someone that did his. You are wasting everyone's time by sending this to AfD. If you truly had evidence that this was worthy of an article then please at least go defend it on AfD. If you have no argument then please do not deprod. When you deprod things at the rate of 2 a minute as you did yesterday for instance you are clearly not doing research and your negligence is an imposition on the other editors who are spending time to clean up Misplaced Pages. Pascal.Tesson 21:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
- The prod tag said "Not notable" which implies the prodder felt no research was necessary. If the article is supposed to be unverifiable or an exaggeration, that should be confirmed by AFD. Kappa 23:01, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
AfDs on songs
I've noticed your name turning up on a couple of song AfDs recently, talking about deletion as a "betrayal of fans" and things like that. The songs are never nominated for deletion to "betray fans" or anything like that. It's always a case of whether or not a given song is in fact notable. I'll be the first to admit that there are some album tracks by some of my favourite artists which I'd love to see an article on here, but just because a song is a real fan favourite doesn't necessarily mean it's notable in a wider sense. BigHaz - Schreit mich an (Review me) 07:27, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
- Betrayal is the result if its deleted. Someone who listens to a song and wants to know what it's about or how it was inspired doesn't care if its "notable" or not. Kappa 15:58, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Yenta Claus
I am trying to figure out what is wrong and was wondering if labeling the AfD as biographical by an editor was the right place for a holiday folk hero?--Cuddles 03:33, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
- Well "what is wrong" seems to be that there isn't enough verifiable evidence out there to prove that it's an established, or even an emerging, cultural phenomenon. I know not everything is on google, but unfortunately wikipedia has to demand evidence (although it's inconsistent, I know). I know you worked hard to provide it and it's a pity if the article still gets deleted. My feeling is that this is a real but currently unverifiable thing, hopefully more evidence will appear with time. If you could find it in a couple more books, that would probably be enough, or it might get more net coverage during the holiday season.
- There are other places that will accept your article, perhaps wikinfo or other alternatives to wp. I'm sorry you have had such an unpleasant experience here. Also it's clearly not a biography so I've recategorized it to "society" where it fits a little better. Kappa 04:14, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
- P.S. Even if it's deleted, with the current evidence you might be able to mention Yenta in another article like Hanukkah Harry. Kappa 04:15, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
De-Prodding etc
Hi, just a quick request to be more specific with your reasons for de-prodding in various music related articles. Particularly, it's a bit confusing to see WP:MUSIC as a reason to de-PROD when an article clearly makes no attempt to assert that it meets the requirements. Thanks... (No more bongos 12:42, 19 September 2006 (UTC))
- Do you want to be more specific here? Kappa 15:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC)