![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
It's perhaps a bit hidden, but somebody added Catriona Campbell to this AfD and that article still has an AfD notice on it. With greetings from a snowy Southern France... -- Guillaume2303 ( talk) 09:57, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. 213.132.171.210 ( talk) 15:04, 3 February 2012 (UTC) 213.132.171.210 ( talk)
Mitchsdiamond ( talk) 13:52, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
The article had been rewritten to hopefully address the issues, but did not display in the articles for deletion for the benefit of the editors; I am completely confused as to when to delete or what to delete or where to delete and edit so the changes are available to the editors. I posted the changes to my talk and to the articles talk page, but it never showed up and a decision to delete was apparently made against the old text...am I correct?? Am I supposed to edit out the old text and replace it with the new??? {{ help}} Mitchsdiamond ( talk) 21:25, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
thank you.. Was my article deleted based upon the original entry and not on the revised entry of February 4th (which has completely disappeard) that did not show up in the article for deletion?. Mitchsdiamond ( talk) 00:24, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Martjin, all of your points are well taken and the time you spent is appreciated. At some point in the future, I will readdress the subject of the VLFS either as a sub-topic of silverpoint or via articles for creation. ..silverpoint stylus...to include the advancement of the VLFS. The silverpoint stylus has been the subject of significant coverage in independent reliable sources and adequate materials independently supporting this subject should meet the criteria for inclusion you enumerated for Wiki. Regards. Mitchsdiamond ( talk) 14:28, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi--thanks for fixing up the article. I'm sorry for not quite getting the format or understanding how this works. The reference cites two or thee pages. I quote the source almost directly. To add context, this should be categorized somehow as another pagan oriigin for a Christian festival. It's importance is that Cerberus isn't yet defined and Someone out there might have more information about the origin of this festival per Christianity. Hopefully the stub will get people looking for this material. Carl Jung described it in detail. Having read about this my gut tells me that it's a roman festival possibly pushed into Europe. Then christianized. I'm hoping to place this out there and the community can help flesh it out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dustynyfeathers ( talk • contribs) 21:18, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Dear Martijn
Hey my apologies to you if i have offended you as you may have known i am new to Wikipedia messages and the Speedy Deletion. Could you please explain to me in detail how can i edit my page but at the same time do not remove the Tags attached to my page. I do not wish to offend you or for that matter any of the moderators and even i am against disruptive editing. I have read the guidelines but still i feel i am overlooking some key issues for it catching attention of the moderators because of my mistake.
Regards Amigo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gothika11 ( talk • contribs) 14:35, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm curious about your "no consensus" close of WP:Articles for deletion/Stefano Passarello. Given that there were no policy-based !votes in favor of keeping the article, and that the article itself is an unsourced BLP, it seemed to me to be an uncontroversial delete. Can you explain your thoughts on this one to me? Thanks, Dori ☾ Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 10:54, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
I'm looking for a third opinion on the above close. Martijn Hoekstra ( talk) 22:01, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I just started a Wikipedia page on Darío Fernández Jaén for a project in my Intro to Mass Communications class at the university I'm attending. Posting our sources was the first step our professor wanted us to take, that's why that was all the article contained.
108.86.196.254 ( talk) 20:28, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
You've just closed this debate as a keep, is it possible for you to weigh up on the points raised - I don't see that any of the keep votes have shown that the company was notable (only 1 mention in local not even regional news) outwith the coverage of the single event of their demise (which surely would make that event notable long before it made the company notable). Stuart.Jamieson ( talk) 01:01, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Dear Martijn, I am the administrator for the subject page "TigerHeat." I see recently that my page was deleted under the code "G8: Redirect." I was hoping for a better explanation. Wikipedia suggests that I contact the administrator to find out why. I would like to correct the problem and get my page reinstated, if possible. Please respond.
--George, Feb. 6, 2012 TigerHeat ( talk) 06:41, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
I cannot understand why you have deleted our page. You say copyright infringement but we have copyright on everything there. Can you please explain.
Grace Yoxon, Director IOSF
Thanks Martijn But then surely you should be removing the RSPCA page amongst others. On their page it says:
"This article relies on references to primary sources or sources affiliated with the subject, rather than references from independent authors and third-party publications."
So what you are saying about us is the same.
Grace Director IOSF
Sorry Martijn, but we are not trying to establish the presence for IOSF as if you Google otter on its own we come up second, only after your own Wikipedia page. So if people want to find us that way they can easily do it, but an encyclopedia is meant to be a source of information on all topics and organisations and this is why we want to be included.
We have many links through different organisations, including RSPCA, Scottish SPCA, IUCN Otter Specialists Grou,p and looking briefly through Google Books I have found the following:
So I do think it is valid to have a page.
One problem I have is that I can't actually see what we put in the Wikipedia page now to see how we could alter it?
Grace Yoxon Director International Otter Survival Fund
Hey, I did a little (ok, a lot) more work on my background write-up. Take a look at your leisure: User_talk:Ocaasi/An. I don't think I missed much, and although it probably needs an edit here and there, think it conveys most of what I've experienced here. Cheers! Ocaasi t | c 07:24, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you, Martijn, for the explanation regarding my TigerHeat article's deletion. It seems they feel my sources are not credible. I do have a new source to add to my article, which is below if you could take a look. Is this a better source? Also, I noticed a few of my previous sources were links that no longer work so I am looking to update those. With that said, what are the chances of getting my page reinstated with this new source and correcting a few of the others? When an article is deleted, is that a "done deal" or is there ever a possibility of getting it reinstated? What are my chances?
http://www.frontiersla.com/Features/Highlights/Story.aspx?ID=1651187
--George TigerHeat ( talk) 07:28, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Dear Martijn, thank you very much for your support. I am a complete newcomer, so I do not know, whether this is the correct place to answer to your questions. Yesterday I had to leave. By the way, I live just 25 km south of Darmstadt, Alkmaar's partner town. I spent a day at Alkmaar. Lovely place!
Now to your questions:
Article title: Elsass-Lothringische Privatsammlungen (Sammlung Spetz-Isenheim) Periodical: Das Kunstgewerbe in Elsass-Lothringen Pages: 43-44, 109, 111-112, 124, 131, 140 Publisher: Ludolf Beust, Verlagsbuchhandlung, Strassburg i. Els. Issue: 1 Date: 1901 Author: Anton Seder, Friedrich Leitschuh
Confusion came from the online bibliography of the uni Heidelberg. Now, I looked through the periodical itself. The Isenheim above is that of the famous altar painting by Mattias Grünewald.
-- BR.ST.MF ( talk) 13:32, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Greetings, Martijn. I have reviewed and responded to your submission at the Signpost's Opinion desk. You may wish to read and respond. Regards, Skomorokh 05:15, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Dear Sir You have recently Delited my article Mogilev State A.Kuleshov University The idea of deletion was- copyright. It was mentioned that the article was copied from www.msu.mogilev.by You are right it was copied but!!! I was the person you wrote at www.msu.mogilev.by - I work at this University as the Head of International Relations Department - http://en.msu.mogilev.by/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=153&Itemid=297 so my job was to write the article about the university. and of course I put the same article at Wikipedia. Hope we can deal this misunderstanding. For prooving that I really a person fron International relations department - please contact me (there is a e-mail at the official page of the university - http://en.msu.mogilev.by/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=153&Itemid=297) Best regards and hope my article will be back soon Sergej Machekin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timon323 ( talk • contribs) 16:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
can you check your link about the t shirt I ask Jimbo about it is bad. TucsonDavidU.S.A. 02:07, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello Martijn. You've closed this deletion discussion. I have some concerns with the result of the AfD, which I discussed with the nominator. What do you think about my proposal? Thanks for any answer. Best regards. -- Vejvančický ( talk | contribs) 07:18, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
The notice on my talk page said to bring any questions to you or the help desk, so ... first off, I am, of course, not an unregistered user, and in fact have created a couple articles before this; I clicked on the "submit" button on my draft without knowing exactly what it was. Is this a problem, or should I just go with it and be more careful next time?-- Invisiboy42293 ( talk) 20:42, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for closing the AfD. When you deleted, you deleted the original article at Casimer&casimir (note the lowercase second 'c'). Before or during the AfD, the article was moved to Casimer&Casimir (note the capital second 'c') and the original, lowercase was converted to a redirect. Long story short, you deleted the lowercase 'c' redirect, but the article at uppercase 'C' still remains. Care to delete it too? Thanks again! Livit⇑ Eh?/ What? 17:47, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Scottywong has tagged Casimer&Casimir for G4 speedy, saying that it was a recreation of an article previously deleted at AFD. I can find no evidence that this was ever at AFD — except for the discussion that you closed just today! My first thought was that someone had undone your deletion, but both log entries are speedy deletions from before the current incarnation was created. Could you look into this confusing situation, and then either delete this article or tell Scottywong why it shouldn't be deleted? Thanks! Nyttend ( talk) 01:20, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
First I should say this isn't important. If you have other things to do please ignore.
I was reading your user page. Reminded me of an idea I had a while back.
Say, by lack of better words, we have 3 kinds of 'deletions': DELETE, KEEP and REDIRECT.
If the article is a keeper it either stays or gets another chance to be improved.
If it is to be deleted then access is restricted to administrators.
With redirects/mergers the history of the page is preserved.
The thing I noticed is that the deletion process was designed to clean up trash. It is really good at that, if it isn't a speedy delete AFD will kill the trash. However, the AFD process became a process used to judge content. Something it wasn't designed to do. There are articles that are kept while they should really be deleted and there are articles that are deleted while they should really be kept.
An AFD deadline is nice to stay productive but if there is reason to doubt the conclusion then both DELETE and KEEP are the wrong answer.
Such articles shouldn't be kept or deleted, they should be blanked so that other editors can work on them 10 years later. Could recycle material from the article. Even the talk page could be useful if some one has a great source for the future article.
After completely terminating a topic editors are discouraged from writing an article that doesn't suck. While KEEP would put the unfinished crap in the mainspace for god knows how long.
I think a closing admin could decide what to do much faster, more accurate and more efficiently if he could just wipe articles when in doubt.
A way to both delete and preserve doubtful articles.
You seem familiar with AFD, do you think this could work?
From the current afd's most would not qualify at all. But for example Jacob Biamonte could one day become some one. There is enough on the page to give a user in 2030 something to start with. He might become note worthy, perhaps we missed his most significant accomplishment.
Seeing the state of the article before it was deleted allows the editor to see if there is still hope for the article. The potential editor isn't going to ask any administrators for this. There is also no harm in having a constructive discussion about an article that was deemed not good enough.
And when will that be? Do we need to hurry? Is there any reason to rush a final conclusion? Should we prevent the future editor from doing his work?
Also, if the reasoning doesn't match the criteria for note worthiness a user shouldn't have to be an admin to revert good faith AFD's. If the page is simply blanked no harm is done. The deletionists get what they think is correct and the user who wants to restore the article 2 years later also gets what he wants. If it still sucks we can help him, if that fails we can just delete it again. No harm done. Much better than having the turd in mainspace for 2 years?
The usual deletion debate isn't going to motivate anyone to re-create an article from scratch. It is unreasonable to demand that extra work from users if the article wasn't clearly worth deleting.
There isn't any way to tell atm. I've asked administrators for articles that had been deleted. They turned out to be so bad it was embarrassing to even ask for them. I've stopped doing that. If doubtful articles can be blanked there is no need to ask admins for "articles". If it was deleted entirely one can assume there was nothing there worth keeping.
What are your thoughts?
84.106.26.81 ( talk) 17:59, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Just a thought, I didn't see consensus to delete 2013 BCS National Championship Game among the multiple nominations at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2013 BCS National Championship Game, as a number of votes were "delete all but (that one)..." I agree the consensus was to delete all the rest. I think you could reasonably amend the close along those lines if you would consider it.-- Milowent • has spoken 15:52, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
2013 BCS National Championship Game should not have been deleted. I realize that there were a lot of "delete all" votes in the AfD, but they were, frankly, uninformed. This article seemed to get uncritically swept into a deletion tide with its co-nominees, all of which did deserve to be deleted. Or perhaps some editors were simply thrown off by the calendar-wrap of the college football season, i.e. the 2012 season extends just into January 2013. Please restore or userfy this article to my space. We've got plenty of other articles started for the 2012 season: see Category:2012 NCAA Division I FBS football season. Thanks. Jweiss11 ( talk) 20:27, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Greetings MH. Methinks you will find the block be due to our continuing 'battle of wills' with some of the 'Uber Nerds' ! Bullocks Coaches be well known to moi, but, the manner of our edits be not to the liking of the sadder Uber Nerds. Our edits though be true to life. Guessing those saddo's wish only to deny knowledge to others. As for our piece on the talk page of that article, well, the clue be in the title - TALK ! They will have to keep trying their damnedest to deny others our knowledge ! Why Uber Nerds ? Why Saddo's ? - if you click onto their contributions register you will see these Social Inadequate's appear to spend all their spare time 'policing' Wiki-world - they obviously have no life ! 92.40.51.75 ( talk) 20:35, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
I guess you didn't read my comments on the talk page. I haven't edited the article before.
Grammatophyllum wallisii is a different species of Grammatophyllum speciosum. Two different species can and do have separate articles.
Could the page be restored, so I can help the creating, new editor clean up the page. Bgwhite ( talk) 22:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Given that result was "delete", may be you could also delete the previous revisions of User:Omahacrab (a mirror of the article) in order to complete the move? — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff ( talk) 08:52, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello Martijn. It was nice to have someone welcoming me to wikipedia. I needed some help and there is no one else I could find. Can you explain to me how I can add pictures to a biographical page?( Jatinbhatt blap ( talk) 17:42, 23 February 2012 (UTC))
Hi there,
I've read the rules of notability and I've used several existing Wiki pages as examples, so I'm confused why this keeps getting rejected. MovNat is part of a global movement centered around ancestral/evolutionary nutrition and exercise. This page is more robust and cited than several other pages of people included in this movement like Robb Wolf and Mark Sisson. Further, Erwan Le Corre is highlighted in red on the Paleolithic Diet page as someone who should have a Wiki page. He is quoted in the Parkour Wiki page. He's presented to NASA and he's a visible figure in evolutionary fitness. He's been featured in dozens of magazines around the world.
I'm at a loss here. If I could get some specific feedback, it would be much appreciated.
Kcbphelps ( talk) 20:41, 23 February 2012 (UTC)Kcbphelps — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcbphelps ( talk • contribs) 20:40, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Can you have a look at the above, you deleted/userfied it following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2013 BCS National Championship Game and it was then moved back again 17 hours later without another edit. Mt king (edits) 20:25, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
It's perhaps a bit hidden, but somebody added Catriona Campbell to this AfD and that article still has an AfD notice on it. With greetings from a snowy Southern France... -- Guillaume2303 ( talk) 09:57, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. 213.132.171.210 ( talk) 15:04, 3 February 2012 (UTC) 213.132.171.210 ( talk)
Mitchsdiamond ( talk) 13:52, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
The article had been rewritten to hopefully address the issues, but did not display in the articles for deletion for the benefit of the editors; I am completely confused as to when to delete or what to delete or where to delete and edit so the changes are available to the editors. I posted the changes to my talk and to the articles talk page, but it never showed up and a decision to delete was apparently made against the old text...am I correct?? Am I supposed to edit out the old text and replace it with the new??? {{ help}} Mitchsdiamond ( talk) 21:25, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
thank you.. Was my article deleted based upon the original entry and not on the revised entry of February 4th (which has completely disappeard) that did not show up in the article for deletion?. Mitchsdiamond ( talk) 00:24, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Martjin, all of your points are well taken and the time you spent is appreciated. At some point in the future, I will readdress the subject of the VLFS either as a sub-topic of silverpoint or via articles for creation. ..silverpoint stylus...to include the advancement of the VLFS. The silverpoint stylus has been the subject of significant coverage in independent reliable sources and adequate materials independently supporting this subject should meet the criteria for inclusion you enumerated for Wiki. Regards. Mitchsdiamond ( talk) 14:28, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi--thanks for fixing up the article. I'm sorry for not quite getting the format or understanding how this works. The reference cites two or thee pages. I quote the source almost directly. To add context, this should be categorized somehow as another pagan oriigin for a Christian festival. It's importance is that Cerberus isn't yet defined and Someone out there might have more information about the origin of this festival per Christianity. Hopefully the stub will get people looking for this material. Carl Jung described it in detail. Having read about this my gut tells me that it's a roman festival possibly pushed into Europe. Then christianized. I'm hoping to place this out there and the community can help flesh it out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dustynyfeathers ( talk • contribs) 21:18, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Dear Martijn
Hey my apologies to you if i have offended you as you may have known i am new to Wikipedia messages and the Speedy Deletion. Could you please explain to me in detail how can i edit my page but at the same time do not remove the Tags attached to my page. I do not wish to offend you or for that matter any of the moderators and even i am against disruptive editing. I have read the guidelines but still i feel i am overlooking some key issues for it catching attention of the moderators because of my mistake.
Regards Amigo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gothika11 ( talk • contribs) 14:35, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm curious about your "no consensus" close of WP:Articles for deletion/Stefano Passarello. Given that there were no policy-based !votes in favor of keeping the article, and that the article itself is an unsourced BLP, it seemed to me to be an uncontroversial delete. Can you explain your thoughts on this one to me? Thanks, Dori ☾ Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 10:54, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
I'm looking for a third opinion on the above close. Martijn Hoekstra ( talk) 22:01, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I just started a Wikipedia page on Darío Fernández Jaén for a project in my Intro to Mass Communications class at the university I'm attending. Posting our sources was the first step our professor wanted us to take, that's why that was all the article contained.
108.86.196.254 ( talk) 20:28, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
You've just closed this debate as a keep, is it possible for you to weigh up on the points raised - I don't see that any of the keep votes have shown that the company was notable (only 1 mention in local not even regional news) outwith the coverage of the single event of their demise (which surely would make that event notable long before it made the company notable). Stuart.Jamieson ( talk) 01:01, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Dear Martijn, I am the administrator for the subject page "TigerHeat." I see recently that my page was deleted under the code "G8: Redirect." I was hoping for a better explanation. Wikipedia suggests that I contact the administrator to find out why. I would like to correct the problem and get my page reinstated, if possible. Please respond.
--George, Feb. 6, 2012 TigerHeat ( talk) 06:41, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
I cannot understand why you have deleted our page. You say copyright infringement but we have copyright on everything there. Can you please explain.
Grace Yoxon, Director IOSF
Thanks Martijn But then surely you should be removing the RSPCA page amongst others. On their page it says:
"This article relies on references to primary sources or sources affiliated with the subject, rather than references from independent authors and third-party publications."
So what you are saying about us is the same.
Grace Director IOSF
Sorry Martijn, but we are not trying to establish the presence for IOSF as if you Google otter on its own we come up second, only after your own Wikipedia page. So if people want to find us that way they can easily do it, but an encyclopedia is meant to be a source of information on all topics and organisations and this is why we want to be included.
We have many links through different organisations, including RSPCA, Scottish SPCA, IUCN Otter Specialists Grou,p and looking briefly through Google Books I have found the following:
So I do think it is valid to have a page.
One problem I have is that I can't actually see what we put in the Wikipedia page now to see how we could alter it?
Grace Yoxon Director International Otter Survival Fund
Hey, I did a little (ok, a lot) more work on my background write-up. Take a look at your leisure: User_talk:Ocaasi/An. I don't think I missed much, and although it probably needs an edit here and there, think it conveys most of what I've experienced here. Cheers! Ocaasi t | c 07:24, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you, Martijn, for the explanation regarding my TigerHeat article's deletion. It seems they feel my sources are not credible. I do have a new source to add to my article, which is below if you could take a look. Is this a better source? Also, I noticed a few of my previous sources were links that no longer work so I am looking to update those. With that said, what are the chances of getting my page reinstated with this new source and correcting a few of the others? When an article is deleted, is that a "done deal" or is there ever a possibility of getting it reinstated? What are my chances?
http://www.frontiersla.com/Features/Highlights/Story.aspx?ID=1651187
--George TigerHeat ( talk) 07:28, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Dear Martijn, thank you very much for your support. I am a complete newcomer, so I do not know, whether this is the correct place to answer to your questions. Yesterday I had to leave. By the way, I live just 25 km south of Darmstadt, Alkmaar's partner town. I spent a day at Alkmaar. Lovely place!
Now to your questions:
Article title: Elsass-Lothringische Privatsammlungen (Sammlung Spetz-Isenheim) Periodical: Das Kunstgewerbe in Elsass-Lothringen Pages: 43-44, 109, 111-112, 124, 131, 140 Publisher: Ludolf Beust, Verlagsbuchhandlung, Strassburg i. Els. Issue: 1 Date: 1901 Author: Anton Seder, Friedrich Leitschuh
Confusion came from the online bibliography of the uni Heidelberg. Now, I looked through the periodical itself. The Isenheim above is that of the famous altar painting by Mattias Grünewald.
-- BR.ST.MF ( talk) 13:32, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Greetings, Martijn. I have reviewed and responded to your submission at the Signpost's Opinion desk. You may wish to read and respond. Regards, Skomorokh 05:15, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Dear Sir You have recently Delited my article Mogilev State A.Kuleshov University The idea of deletion was- copyright. It was mentioned that the article was copied from www.msu.mogilev.by You are right it was copied but!!! I was the person you wrote at www.msu.mogilev.by - I work at this University as the Head of International Relations Department - http://en.msu.mogilev.by/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=153&Itemid=297 so my job was to write the article about the university. and of course I put the same article at Wikipedia. Hope we can deal this misunderstanding. For prooving that I really a person fron International relations department - please contact me (there is a e-mail at the official page of the university - http://en.msu.mogilev.by/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=153&Itemid=297) Best regards and hope my article will be back soon Sergej Machekin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timon323 ( talk • contribs) 16:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
can you check your link about the t shirt I ask Jimbo about it is bad. TucsonDavidU.S.A. 02:07, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello Martijn. You've closed this deletion discussion. I have some concerns with the result of the AfD, which I discussed with the nominator. What do you think about my proposal? Thanks for any answer. Best regards. -- Vejvančický ( talk | contribs) 07:18, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
The notice on my talk page said to bring any questions to you or the help desk, so ... first off, I am, of course, not an unregistered user, and in fact have created a couple articles before this; I clicked on the "submit" button on my draft without knowing exactly what it was. Is this a problem, or should I just go with it and be more careful next time?-- Invisiboy42293 ( talk) 20:42, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for closing the AfD. When you deleted, you deleted the original article at Casimer&casimir (note the lowercase second 'c'). Before or during the AfD, the article was moved to Casimer&Casimir (note the capital second 'c') and the original, lowercase was converted to a redirect. Long story short, you deleted the lowercase 'c' redirect, but the article at uppercase 'C' still remains. Care to delete it too? Thanks again! Livit⇑ Eh?/ What? 17:47, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Scottywong has tagged Casimer&Casimir for G4 speedy, saying that it was a recreation of an article previously deleted at AFD. I can find no evidence that this was ever at AFD — except for the discussion that you closed just today! My first thought was that someone had undone your deletion, but both log entries are speedy deletions from before the current incarnation was created. Could you look into this confusing situation, and then either delete this article or tell Scottywong why it shouldn't be deleted? Thanks! Nyttend ( talk) 01:20, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
First I should say this isn't important. If you have other things to do please ignore.
I was reading your user page. Reminded me of an idea I had a while back.
Say, by lack of better words, we have 3 kinds of 'deletions': DELETE, KEEP and REDIRECT.
If the article is a keeper it either stays or gets another chance to be improved.
If it is to be deleted then access is restricted to administrators.
With redirects/mergers the history of the page is preserved.
The thing I noticed is that the deletion process was designed to clean up trash. It is really good at that, if it isn't a speedy delete AFD will kill the trash. However, the AFD process became a process used to judge content. Something it wasn't designed to do. There are articles that are kept while they should really be deleted and there are articles that are deleted while they should really be kept.
An AFD deadline is nice to stay productive but if there is reason to doubt the conclusion then both DELETE and KEEP are the wrong answer.
Such articles shouldn't be kept or deleted, they should be blanked so that other editors can work on them 10 years later. Could recycle material from the article. Even the talk page could be useful if some one has a great source for the future article.
After completely terminating a topic editors are discouraged from writing an article that doesn't suck. While KEEP would put the unfinished crap in the mainspace for god knows how long.
I think a closing admin could decide what to do much faster, more accurate and more efficiently if he could just wipe articles when in doubt.
A way to both delete and preserve doubtful articles.
You seem familiar with AFD, do you think this could work?
From the current afd's most would not qualify at all. But for example Jacob Biamonte could one day become some one. There is enough on the page to give a user in 2030 something to start with. He might become note worthy, perhaps we missed his most significant accomplishment.
Seeing the state of the article before it was deleted allows the editor to see if there is still hope for the article. The potential editor isn't going to ask any administrators for this. There is also no harm in having a constructive discussion about an article that was deemed not good enough.
And when will that be? Do we need to hurry? Is there any reason to rush a final conclusion? Should we prevent the future editor from doing his work?
Also, if the reasoning doesn't match the criteria for note worthiness a user shouldn't have to be an admin to revert good faith AFD's. If the page is simply blanked no harm is done. The deletionists get what they think is correct and the user who wants to restore the article 2 years later also gets what he wants. If it still sucks we can help him, if that fails we can just delete it again. No harm done. Much better than having the turd in mainspace for 2 years?
The usual deletion debate isn't going to motivate anyone to re-create an article from scratch. It is unreasonable to demand that extra work from users if the article wasn't clearly worth deleting.
There isn't any way to tell atm. I've asked administrators for articles that had been deleted. They turned out to be so bad it was embarrassing to even ask for them. I've stopped doing that. If doubtful articles can be blanked there is no need to ask admins for "articles". If it was deleted entirely one can assume there was nothing there worth keeping.
What are your thoughts?
84.106.26.81 ( talk) 17:59, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Just a thought, I didn't see consensus to delete 2013 BCS National Championship Game among the multiple nominations at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2013 BCS National Championship Game, as a number of votes were "delete all but (that one)..." I agree the consensus was to delete all the rest. I think you could reasonably amend the close along those lines if you would consider it.-- Milowent • has spoken 15:52, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
2013 BCS National Championship Game should not have been deleted. I realize that there were a lot of "delete all" votes in the AfD, but they were, frankly, uninformed. This article seemed to get uncritically swept into a deletion tide with its co-nominees, all of which did deserve to be deleted. Or perhaps some editors were simply thrown off by the calendar-wrap of the college football season, i.e. the 2012 season extends just into January 2013. Please restore or userfy this article to my space. We've got plenty of other articles started for the 2012 season: see Category:2012 NCAA Division I FBS football season. Thanks. Jweiss11 ( talk) 20:27, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Greetings MH. Methinks you will find the block be due to our continuing 'battle of wills' with some of the 'Uber Nerds' ! Bullocks Coaches be well known to moi, but, the manner of our edits be not to the liking of the sadder Uber Nerds. Our edits though be true to life. Guessing those saddo's wish only to deny knowledge to others. As for our piece on the talk page of that article, well, the clue be in the title - TALK ! They will have to keep trying their damnedest to deny others our knowledge ! Why Uber Nerds ? Why Saddo's ? - if you click onto their contributions register you will see these Social Inadequate's appear to spend all their spare time 'policing' Wiki-world - they obviously have no life ! 92.40.51.75 ( talk) 20:35, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
I guess you didn't read my comments on the talk page. I haven't edited the article before.
Grammatophyllum wallisii is a different species of Grammatophyllum speciosum. Two different species can and do have separate articles.
Could the page be restored, so I can help the creating, new editor clean up the page. Bgwhite ( talk) 22:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Given that result was "delete", may be you could also delete the previous revisions of User:Omahacrab (a mirror of the article) in order to complete the move? — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff ( talk) 08:52, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello Martijn. It was nice to have someone welcoming me to wikipedia. I needed some help and there is no one else I could find. Can you explain to me how I can add pictures to a biographical page?( Jatinbhatt blap ( talk) 17:42, 23 February 2012 (UTC))
Hi there,
I've read the rules of notability and I've used several existing Wiki pages as examples, so I'm confused why this keeps getting rejected. MovNat is part of a global movement centered around ancestral/evolutionary nutrition and exercise. This page is more robust and cited than several other pages of people included in this movement like Robb Wolf and Mark Sisson. Further, Erwan Le Corre is highlighted in red on the Paleolithic Diet page as someone who should have a Wiki page. He is quoted in the Parkour Wiki page. He's presented to NASA and he's a visible figure in evolutionary fitness. He's been featured in dozens of magazines around the world.
I'm at a loss here. If I could get some specific feedback, it would be much appreciated.
Kcbphelps ( talk) 20:41, 23 February 2012 (UTC)Kcbphelps — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcbphelps ( talk • contribs) 20:40, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Can you have a look at the above, you deleted/userfied it following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2013 BCS National Championship Game and it was then moved back again 17 hours later without another edit. Mt king (edits) 20:25, 24 February 2012 (UTC)