Hi, I've closed the above DRV early in light of the overwhelming consensus. Thing is, I'm largely bot-illiterate, and I'm not keen of de-tagging 700 categories by hand. I'm hoping someone will pick up on this task organically, but where can I go to make the request. (I ask you because it has been established that you know everything, :) and you concur in the result here) Best wishes, Xoloz 14:34, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Dear editor bd2412: I have noticed that an article called Shaun Kranish has been deleted. I have looked and looked, but I can't seem to find a way to locate the record of the discussion, if any, of the deletion of the article. (It was a bio of a living person, and probably should have been deleted as only marginally notable, in my view.) I think the deletion must have occurred in the past few weeks, but although I had the article bookmarked I never caught any warning that it would be deleted. Can you help me find the discussion (if any) of the deletion of the article? Yours, Famspear 03:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
You gave your recommendation when the article was proposed for deletion, so I thought you might like to weigh in on the AfD. -- JJLatWiki ( talk) 16:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC) Category for Deletion: Category:Religious radio stations in the United StatesI would like to Speedily Delete the above Category because the articles that were there are better described as Category:Christian radio stations in the United States which is where they are now. I would like it Speedily Deleted before more articles are added. What should I do? Kathleen.wright5 10:41, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi BD2412, can you please explain to User:Pseudomonas that pages like the one I just did on Dickinson Wright PLLC aren't candidates for speedy deletion simply because they mention a private company? This guy doesn't seem to have a good grasp of the guidelines. -- Eastlaw ( talk) 16:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
![]() RfD nomination of Miscellaneous deletionI have nominated Miscellaneous deletion ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. MBisanz talk 08:08, 28 November 2008 (UTC) Good point, I've refined the list and split off the attack page to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ed Poor/FM. Tim Vickers ( talk) 18:37, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
You missed one. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 03:29, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Hiya... that image you uploaded of Marina Orlova ( File:Marina Orlova.JPG) - how did you get it? If it was an email from someone, can you kick it along to Permissions so the version which is on Commons can be tagged for OTRS purposes? Tabercil ( talk) 01:13, 7 January 2009 (UTC) Hey BD2412, congratulations on having your article pass the VfD process with a Keep. Good luck with the rest of your articles, and I look forward to reading them. Just to let you know, even when the consensus appears to be Keep, you should wait until we have finished the VfD process before you remove the boilerplate text stating the article is up for VfD (you can, of course, continue to work on the article during the VfD process, as long as you keep the boilerplate text up). I know that sometimes it seems that the VfD process takes a long time to complete, but if you have a look at the old VfD articles, you can see that we have a huge backlog. Thanks. :-) -- Death phoenix 03:54, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) Given that the article is now about the pre-existing DC character who was mentioned in the Powerpuff Girls episode, rather than about the PPG reference itself, can I convince you to change your vote? DS 20:57, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC) I just read that article that you wanted me to expand, and I think it is already expanded now. It is just as complex as the magic sword article that was originally a microstub. -- SuperDude 04:32, 3 May 2005 (UTC) Hi, please do not delete the Slut Girl page, it is a very good comic book, and everyone I know who has read it thinks it's great (and everyone I know has read it). Brjatlick 22:07, 5 May 2005 (UTC) I saw that you added some names to the List of Papabili in the 2005 Conclave,specifically Cardinal Turkson,who was the subject of discussion on the talk page for the Papal conclave, 2005 article as to why he had been put on the list that was then in that article before being separated out. As a search determined no evidence of anyone outside the Wikipedia article itself considering that he was Papabile,he was removed. I don't see what is gained by having him back on the list and have removed him (also from the "Possible successors to Pope John Paul II" category).--Louis E./le@put.com/ 12.144.5.2 20:00, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've closed this discussion as it seems to have reached a consensual conclusion. Please take a look at the conclusion and note (on the talk page) if you agree with its consensuality. Yours, R adiant _* 10:49, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC) Vote changed to 'keep'. Thanks for rewriting! R adiant _* 11:51, May 17, 2005 (UTC) Thanks for the text -- I have integrated it into Template:PotentialVanity. -- Arcadian 15:00, 17 May 2005 (UTC) Your comment "Keep. K-12's are inherently notable because the entire maturation experience occurs there for some." in VfD:Cairns Christian College was some badly needed humor! Thanks! With that kind of wit, I'm sure you'll make a good attorney. Although I've think I've been keeping my cool over the whole daily VfD spamming incidents, I know I needed some humor to take some stress off underneath the surface. ...if only you'd posted your comments in a K-8 article instead... (it would have still been true!) :) -- Unfocused 15:21, 17 May 2005 (UTC) The policy is completely screwed up regarding rewrites and revotes. That is: it seems there is no official way for calling for a revote or for discounting or redoing old votes. I ran into the same problem with List of incidents famously considered great blunders (still on vfd). The article was totally rewritten.... so I asked for a revote, thinking that a revote only made sense, and people started screaming at me "No no! I voted already!" A big mess. The vfd process needs to be revised. I *have* made a proposal for a sensible method of called a revote, if you are interested: Wikipedia:Revotes on Vfd. But note that this is JUST A PROPOSAL. It is not policy. (Yet.) Do not use this unofficial proposal to call a revote. - Pioneer-12 05:03, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
Voted. Brosnan, as you might expect from my user name, is on my watchlist so I took care of that crap as soon as I saw it :) K1Bond007 21:53, May 10, 2005 (UTC) Hi there! This discussion has drawn to a close, so I've archived it and put up conclusions. Could you please look at them and indicate on the talk page if you find them acceptable by consensus? Thanks. R adiant _* 12:29, May 23, 2005 (UTC) Hi there! I've copy/pasted your comment to Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy/names and surnames, hope you don't mind?
Actually, the new Lee Harris article is apparently about a different person; the first one was about a teenage musician. Thanks for checking up on it, though. CDC (talk) 17:28, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC) See discussion under Vfd (June 9th)... the three step nomination for deletion seems to have gone astray. Current page shows Wikipedia votes for deletion\Drum Wrench twice. Both times in RED, indicating to me that the Subst|vfd process went awry when I tried to nominate Drum Wrench article. Don't know how to get an Duty Administrator to see, but the second step seemed to work fine. Sorry for the hassle, but I've followed some of your comments and see from your user page you probably know what's what. Thanks. Frank Fabartus 02:24, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
No problem, I was just trying to tidy things up and didn't realize we were still waiting for the delete. I'll put a real article (or at least a stub) up once that happens. Thanks for the heads-up. -- PolPotPie 02:34, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) Hey, I like your style of VFD voting. Your comments usually make me laugh :) Keep it up!
That works for me. I'll change my vote. Rick K 18:24, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC) Ah, thanks, I didn't even think to check the edit history. Well, let's revert it and put the VfD header back on and discuss that version. I'll do that. Rick K 20:58, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC) Hi BD: Please see: Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 June 17#Category:Jewish Philosophers. Thank you. IZAK 07:04, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC) Just wanted to say I appreciate your efforts on the Abortion article, but I don't think that the new article is the way to go. I have listed it on VfD [1], but it is nothing personal.-- Tznkai 14:37, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) I read your comment on the talk page of the vote for deletion, and I was wondering what is the name of the parody by Tenacious D of toxicity? Yuber (talk) 01:20, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC) Tim Smith VfDWhile I respect your reasons for voting to keep this article, I would note that I have been unable to find anything on Google that verifies that the subject of the article was ever actually on the ballot for the position for which the article claims him to have been a candidate, nor that he received even a single vote. I note also that the website linked from the article says "Tim Smith for Governor". -- BD2412 talk 03:10, 2005 Jun 23 (UTC)
Your comment on united Statian VfDYou wrote: "This uncromulent neologism disembiggens Wikipedia." You, sir (or madam), are my god. Ground Zero 21:16, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) Good move with the Delta Tau Delta VfD; we don't need it clogging up the system. Does a note about the failed VfD need to go on the talk page? And by the way, good luck on your bar exam! -- Essjay · Talk 08:06, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC) Hi there! I don't disagree with your closing this VFD, but could you please reword your reasons for doing so? We've had a lengthy debate a couple months ago over "closing all nominations that don't include a valid reason" and it's a rather confusing matter since not everybody agrees on what would be a valid reason, nor do people agree whether the reasons listed at the deletion policy are all-inclusive. Yours, R adiant _>|< 13:12, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
I'd be grateful if you'd remove the cricket matches you are listing on VfD from VfD. They are part of a series of articles covering the whole of the 2005 English cricket season (look on this page to see what the Cricket WikiProject is doing). Clearly it is inappropriate to miss out some games (and equally clearly inappropriate to delete the whole project). Kind regards, jguk 28 June 2005 21:42 (UTC)
My two varsity awards this year are very notable. Where are your varsity awards?
You asked about the American Moderation Party. I founded it, and the website for more information can be found here: http://www.geocities.com/moderationparty/AMP.htm Unfortunately, my article has been pegged for deletion. I tried to make it as unbiased and objective as possible. I would like to re-write it if it means I can keep the article up, because I would like to have people read about it without necessarily promoting it overtly. I notice there are articles for the other major and third parties, so I see no objective reason why my article cannot remain. But if you can offer some suggestions as to how to rewrite it, I am welcome to them. This is my first submission to Wikipedia. I am not trying to spam, but I do want to get the information out there. E-mail me if you like at jj4sad6@yahoo.com Thanks in advance. Thanks for that. It was certainly interfering with the comprehensibility of the page. -- Ngb 30 June 2005 16:59 (UTC) Hi there! I've rewritten the article Lie in repose, and thought I would let you know. If your vote changes as a result of the rewrite, you can go here to switch it. Best wishes, regardless of your decision.-- Scimitar 30 June 2005 22:26 (UTC) I will withhold changing my vote until the last sentence of this article is translated into comprehensible English. At this point, I have no idea what he actually won, and Google is of little help in adding light (or I'd have repaired it myself). If his win is noteworthy, I will reconsider my vote. Denni ☯ 2005 July 4 01:03 (UTC) PBurka pointed out that an important omission from this proposal: a band could meet WP:MUSIC criterion #5 (sharing a member with a famous band) and still be speedily deletable by this criterion. I've added a sentence to the proposal to reflect this: it now reads An article about a musician or music group that does not assert having released at least one album, nor having had media coverage, nor having a member that is or was also part of a well-known music group. If the assertion is disputed or controversial, it should be taken to VFD instead. Please consider if you support this new wording, and change your vote if not. Yours, R adiant _>|< July 5, 2005 09:54 (UTC) You voted or commented on Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-B or Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-A or both. I have proposed a revised version, at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-C. This version is intended to address objections made by many of those oppsoed to 3-A or 3-B. The revised propsal refers explicitly and directly to the criteria at WP:MUSIC. If you have not already done so, please examine the revised proposal and vote on it also. Thank you. DES 6 July 2005 04:59 (UTC) Thanks. I'm glad someone appreciated it. And to think it was almost removed. Anyway, I gotta say I'm quite inpressed withthe number of edits you have made in quite a short time. Well more than I've made and I've been a pretty active user for more than a year. - R. fiend 15:48, 10 July 2005 (UTC) Seriously, why don't you replace the current Xinjiao article, which is an ad, with the perfectly reasonable little stub you wrote, after which I'm sure everyone else will change their votes? I'd do it, except that'd fuck up the edit history. DS 18:09, 10 July 2005 (UTC) Greetings BD2412! - thanks for voting. Could you elaborate, what is it that you would care to keep: the article about the book or the list of worst movies in itself? (or both?) If the former - then such an article about the book should not be a list of the movies, I believe. If this is the list of "worst movies" that we keep, then 1) how can it ever become NPOV, 2) there are already other such lists in wikipedia (see e.g. references on the article's discussion page), which are kept, after the vfD discussions, on the grounds that they clearly and profoundly state the POV nature of such article. In any case, the article is in need of lots of improvement and doesn't it qualify for deletion just for that. What do you think? - Introvert ( talk) 20:14, 10 July 2005 (UTC) This was created as a proposed merge of several articles found on vfd: A recurring theme in the literary, theatrical and film tradition of comedy is the of stock characters representing authority figures, designed to poke fun at officialdom by showing that its members are not immune to entanglement in the ridiculous. This is an old tradition, well illustrated in works such as Voltaire's Candide. Examples include:
This article anticipates where I was going with the comedy police, comedy priest etc. articles. My intention was to gather all of them under a category of comedy authority figures and expand with examples and history. Sadly, after only one minute my projected series of articles was stopped before getting beyond a few stubs. I'm still stinging from this one (but I'll get over it) - I suppose if the resulting article says approximately the same things I was going to say it won't matter if someone else writes it. -- wayland 11:06, 13 July 2005 (UTC) Note: Material in this article was derived from the merger of articles written by wayland. -- BD2412 talk 23:18, July 13, 2005 (UTC) I've taken these suggestions on board and posted the article as a work in progress at: Authority figures in comedy -- wayland 10:10, 14 July 2005 (UTC) Here's the problem -- just about everything in this insta-article is POV anti-Islam polemics (I can't find anything to keep), but it's the sort of content I would rather not delete wholesale, because if I do I set off troll attacks about "whitewashing." The article is, however, clearly designed to get around the block on the real article. Perhaps a VfD? I looked hard under Speedy and could not find anything in the criteria there that would qualify. Think we have to go a standard route. Is there an admin who would nominate this for deletion? Or can someone else (without my ) do the merge and redirect? Let me know your thoughts. BrandonYusufToropov 03:13, 12 July 2005 (UTC) Thanks for fixing up my multiple nomination on Vfd - I hadn't grasped that all I was missing was a simpel redirect. Ta -- Doc (?) 00:04, 14 July 2005 (UTC) |
Hi, I've closed the above DRV early in light of the overwhelming consensus. Thing is, I'm largely bot-illiterate, and I'm not keen of de-tagging 700 categories by hand. I'm hoping someone will pick up on this task organically, but where can I go to make the request. (I ask you because it has been established that you know everything, :) and you concur in the result here) Best wishes, Xoloz 14:34, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Dear editor bd2412: I have noticed that an article called Shaun Kranish has been deleted. I have looked and looked, but I can't seem to find a way to locate the record of the discussion, if any, of the deletion of the article. (It was a bio of a living person, and probably should have been deleted as only marginally notable, in my view.) I think the deletion must have occurred in the past few weeks, but although I had the article bookmarked I never caught any warning that it would be deleted. Can you help me find the discussion (if any) of the deletion of the article? Yours, Famspear 03:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
You gave your recommendation when the article was proposed for deletion, so I thought you might like to weigh in on the AfD. -- JJLatWiki ( talk) 16:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC) Category for Deletion: Category:Religious radio stations in the United StatesI would like to Speedily Delete the above Category because the articles that were there are better described as Category:Christian radio stations in the United States which is where they are now. I would like it Speedily Deleted before more articles are added. What should I do? Kathleen.wright5 10:41, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi BD2412, can you please explain to User:Pseudomonas that pages like the one I just did on Dickinson Wright PLLC aren't candidates for speedy deletion simply because they mention a private company? This guy doesn't seem to have a good grasp of the guidelines. -- Eastlaw ( talk) 16:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
![]() RfD nomination of Miscellaneous deletionI have nominated Miscellaneous deletion ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. MBisanz talk 08:08, 28 November 2008 (UTC) Good point, I've refined the list and split off the attack page to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ed Poor/FM. Tim Vickers ( talk) 18:37, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
You missed one. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 03:29, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Hiya... that image you uploaded of Marina Orlova ( File:Marina Orlova.JPG) - how did you get it? If it was an email from someone, can you kick it along to Permissions so the version which is on Commons can be tagged for OTRS purposes? Tabercil ( talk) 01:13, 7 January 2009 (UTC) Hey BD2412, congratulations on having your article pass the VfD process with a Keep. Good luck with the rest of your articles, and I look forward to reading them. Just to let you know, even when the consensus appears to be Keep, you should wait until we have finished the VfD process before you remove the boilerplate text stating the article is up for VfD (you can, of course, continue to work on the article during the VfD process, as long as you keep the boilerplate text up). I know that sometimes it seems that the VfD process takes a long time to complete, but if you have a look at the old VfD articles, you can see that we have a huge backlog. Thanks. :-) -- Death phoenix 03:54, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) Given that the article is now about the pre-existing DC character who was mentioned in the Powerpuff Girls episode, rather than about the PPG reference itself, can I convince you to change your vote? DS 20:57, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC) I just read that article that you wanted me to expand, and I think it is already expanded now. It is just as complex as the magic sword article that was originally a microstub. -- SuperDude 04:32, 3 May 2005 (UTC) Hi, please do not delete the Slut Girl page, it is a very good comic book, and everyone I know who has read it thinks it's great (and everyone I know has read it). Brjatlick 22:07, 5 May 2005 (UTC) I saw that you added some names to the List of Papabili in the 2005 Conclave,specifically Cardinal Turkson,who was the subject of discussion on the talk page for the Papal conclave, 2005 article as to why he had been put on the list that was then in that article before being separated out. As a search determined no evidence of anyone outside the Wikipedia article itself considering that he was Papabile,he was removed. I don't see what is gained by having him back on the list and have removed him (also from the "Possible successors to Pope John Paul II" category).--Louis E./le@put.com/ 12.144.5.2 20:00, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've closed this discussion as it seems to have reached a consensual conclusion. Please take a look at the conclusion and note (on the talk page) if you agree with its consensuality. Yours, R adiant _* 10:49, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC) Vote changed to 'keep'. Thanks for rewriting! R adiant _* 11:51, May 17, 2005 (UTC) Thanks for the text -- I have integrated it into Template:PotentialVanity. -- Arcadian 15:00, 17 May 2005 (UTC) Your comment "Keep. K-12's are inherently notable because the entire maturation experience occurs there for some." in VfD:Cairns Christian College was some badly needed humor! Thanks! With that kind of wit, I'm sure you'll make a good attorney. Although I've think I've been keeping my cool over the whole daily VfD spamming incidents, I know I needed some humor to take some stress off underneath the surface. ...if only you'd posted your comments in a K-8 article instead... (it would have still been true!) :) -- Unfocused 15:21, 17 May 2005 (UTC) The policy is completely screwed up regarding rewrites and revotes. That is: it seems there is no official way for calling for a revote or for discounting or redoing old votes. I ran into the same problem with List of incidents famously considered great blunders (still on vfd). The article was totally rewritten.... so I asked for a revote, thinking that a revote only made sense, and people started screaming at me "No no! I voted already!" A big mess. The vfd process needs to be revised. I *have* made a proposal for a sensible method of called a revote, if you are interested: Wikipedia:Revotes on Vfd. But note that this is JUST A PROPOSAL. It is not policy. (Yet.) Do not use this unofficial proposal to call a revote. - Pioneer-12 05:03, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
Voted. Brosnan, as you might expect from my user name, is on my watchlist so I took care of that crap as soon as I saw it :) K1Bond007 21:53, May 10, 2005 (UTC) Hi there! This discussion has drawn to a close, so I've archived it and put up conclusions. Could you please look at them and indicate on the talk page if you find them acceptable by consensus? Thanks. R adiant _* 12:29, May 23, 2005 (UTC) Hi there! I've copy/pasted your comment to Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy/names and surnames, hope you don't mind?
Actually, the new Lee Harris article is apparently about a different person; the first one was about a teenage musician. Thanks for checking up on it, though. CDC (talk) 17:28, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC) See discussion under Vfd (June 9th)... the three step nomination for deletion seems to have gone astray. Current page shows Wikipedia votes for deletion\Drum Wrench twice. Both times in RED, indicating to me that the Subst|vfd process went awry when I tried to nominate Drum Wrench article. Don't know how to get an Duty Administrator to see, but the second step seemed to work fine. Sorry for the hassle, but I've followed some of your comments and see from your user page you probably know what's what. Thanks. Frank Fabartus 02:24, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
No problem, I was just trying to tidy things up and didn't realize we were still waiting for the delete. I'll put a real article (or at least a stub) up once that happens. Thanks for the heads-up. -- PolPotPie 02:34, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) Hey, I like your style of VFD voting. Your comments usually make me laugh :) Keep it up!
That works for me. I'll change my vote. Rick K 18:24, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC) Ah, thanks, I didn't even think to check the edit history. Well, let's revert it and put the VfD header back on and discuss that version. I'll do that. Rick K 20:58, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC) Hi BD: Please see: Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 June 17#Category:Jewish Philosophers. Thank you. IZAK 07:04, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC) Just wanted to say I appreciate your efforts on the Abortion article, but I don't think that the new article is the way to go. I have listed it on VfD [1], but it is nothing personal.-- Tznkai 14:37, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) I read your comment on the talk page of the vote for deletion, and I was wondering what is the name of the parody by Tenacious D of toxicity? Yuber (talk) 01:20, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC) Tim Smith VfDWhile I respect your reasons for voting to keep this article, I would note that I have been unable to find anything on Google that verifies that the subject of the article was ever actually on the ballot for the position for which the article claims him to have been a candidate, nor that he received even a single vote. I note also that the website linked from the article says "Tim Smith for Governor". -- BD2412 talk 03:10, 2005 Jun 23 (UTC)
Your comment on united Statian VfDYou wrote: "This uncromulent neologism disembiggens Wikipedia." You, sir (or madam), are my god. Ground Zero 21:16, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) Good move with the Delta Tau Delta VfD; we don't need it clogging up the system. Does a note about the failed VfD need to go on the talk page? And by the way, good luck on your bar exam! -- Essjay · Talk 08:06, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC) Hi there! I don't disagree with your closing this VFD, but could you please reword your reasons for doing so? We've had a lengthy debate a couple months ago over "closing all nominations that don't include a valid reason" and it's a rather confusing matter since not everybody agrees on what would be a valid reason, nor do people agree whether the reasons listed at the deletion policy are all-inclusive. Yours, R adiant _>|< 13:12, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
I'd be grateful if you'd remove the cricket matches you are listing on VfD from VfD. They are part of a series of articles covering the whole of the 2005 English cricket season (look on this page to see what the Cricket WikiProject is doing). Clearly it is inappropriate to miss out some games (and equally clearly inappropriate to delete the whole project). Kind regards, jguk 28 June 2005 21:42 (UTC)
My two varsity awards this year are very notable. Where are your varsity awards?
You asked about the American Moderation Party. I founded it, and the website for more information can be found here: http://www.geocities.com/moderationparty/AMP.htm Unfortunately, my article has been pegged for deletion. I tried to make it as unbiased and objective as possible. I would like to re-write it if it means I can keep the article up, because I would like to have people read about it without necessarily promoting it overtly. I notice there are articles for the other major and third parties, so I see no objective reason why my article cannot remain. But if you can offer some suggestions as to how to rewrite it, I am welcome to them. This is my first submission to Wikipedia. I am not trying to spam, but I do want to get the information out there. E-mail me if you like at jj4sad6@yahoo.com Thanks in advance. Thanks for that. It was certainly interfering with the comprehensibility of the page. -- Ngb 30 June 2005 16:59 (UTC) Hi there! I've rewritten the article Lie in repose, and thought I would let you know. If your vote changes as a result of the rewrite, you can go here to switch it. Best wishes, regardless of your decision.-- Scimitar 30 June 2005 22:26 (UTC) I will withhold changing my vote until the last sentence of this article is translated into comprehensible English. At this point, I have no idea what he actually won, and Google is of little help in adding light (or I'd have repaired it myself). If his win is noteworthy, I will reconsider my vote. Denni ☯ 2005 July 4 01:03 (UTC) PBurka pointed out that an important omission from this proposal: a band could meet WP:MUSIC criterion #5 (sharing a member with a famous band) and still be speedily deletable by this criterion. I've added a sentence to the proposal to reflect this: it now reads An article about a musician or music group that does not assert having released at least one album, nor having had media coverage, nor having a member that is or was also part of a well-known music group. If the assertion is disputed or controversial, it should be taken to VFD instead. Please consider if you support this new wording, and change your vote if not. Yours, R adiant _>|< July 5, 2005 09:54 (UTC) You voted or commented on Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-B or Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-A or both. I have proposed a revised version, at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-C. This version is intended to address objections made by many of those oppsoed to 3-A or 3-B. The revised propsal refers explicitly and directly to the criteria at WP:MUSIC. If you have not already done so, please examine the revised proposal and vote on it also. Thank you. DES 6 July 2005 04:59 (UTC) Thanks. I'm glad someone appreciated it. And to think it was almost removed. Anyway, I gotta say I'm quite inpressed withthe number of edits you have made in quite a short time. Well more than I've made and I've been a pretty active user for more than a year. - R. fiend 15:48, 10 July 2005 (UTC) Seriously, why don't you replace the current Xinjiao article, which is an ad, with the perfectly reasonable little stub you wrote, after which I'm sure everyone else will change their votes? I'd do it, except that'd fuck up the edit history. DS 18:09, 10 July 2005 (UTC) Greetings BD2412! - thanks for voting. Could you elaborate, what is it that you would care to keep: the article about the book or the list of worst movies in itself? (or both?) If the former - then such an article about the book should not be a list of the movies, I believe. If this is the list of "worst movies" that we keep, then 1) how can it ever become NPOV, 2) there are already other such lists in wikipedia (see e.g. references on the article's discussion page), which are kept, after the vfD discussions, on the grounds that they clearly and profoundly state the POV nature of such article. In any case, the article is in need of lots of improvement and doesn't it qualify for deletion just for that. What do you think? - Introvert ( talk) 20:14, 10 July 2005 (UTC) This was created as a proposed merge of several articles found on vfd: A recurring theme in the literary, theatrical and film tradition of comedy is the of stock characters representing authority figures, designed to poke fun at officialdom by showing that its members are not immune to entanglement in the ridiculous. This is an old tradition, well illustrated in works such as Voltaire's Candide. Examples include:
This article anticipates where I was going with the comedy police, comedy priest etc. articles. My intention was to gather all of them under a category of comedy authority figures and expand with examples and history. Sadly, after only one minute my projected series of articles was stopped before getting beyond a few stubs. I'm still stinging from this one (but I'll get over it) - I suppose if the resulting article says approximately the same things I was going to say it won't matter if someone else writes it. -- wayland 11:06, 13 July 2005 (UTC) Note: Material in this article was derived from the merger of articles written by wayland. -- BD2412 talk 23:18, July 13, 2005 (UTC) I've taken these suggestions on board and posted the article as a work in progress at: Authority figures in comedy -- wayland 10:10, 14 July 2005 (UTC) Here's the problem -- just about everything in this insta-article is POV anti-Islam polemics (I can't find anything to keep), but it's the sort of content I would rather not delete wholesale, because if I do I set off troll attacks about "whitewashing." The article is, however, clearly designed to get around the block on the real article. Perhaps a VfD? I looked hard under Speedy and could not find anything in the criteria there that would qualify. Think we have to go a standard route. Is there an admin who would nominate this for deletion? Or can someone else (without my ) do the merge and redirect? Let me know your thoughts. BrandonYusufToropov 03:13, 12 July 2005 (UTC) Thanks for fixing up my multiple nomination on Vfd - I hadn't grasped that all I was missing was a simpel redirect. Ta -- Doc (?) 00:04, 14 July 2005 (UTC) |