What are your opinions of it? Fuel of the future? 74.12.182.15 ( talk) 08:33, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
I have done some basic work on the Zack Bazzi article, but it is far from complete. As I mentioned, I am not in a position to complete it myself. Others, including Zack, could add more details to the article and make it more informative. In the meantime, I feel I have included enough info to make the case for the notability of Zack. As such, I would like to invite you to re-examine the article and consider removing the "delete" tag. With14ever ( talk) 10:39, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
|
Just a friendly note on a couple of your speedy deletion requests that I just declined. On Ann Maartmann, the article specifically said she's a popular singer, which is a claim of importance, so it's not eligible for an A7 speedy deletion. Prod or AfD would be the way to go on those. And tagging it for deletion 2 minutes after it was created is considered bitey by many Wikipedians.
On Zack Bazzi, the Keith Olbermann, BBC and NPR references are enough of a claim of importance to avoid speedy deletion. Again, prod or AfD is the way to go on this. Additionally, with a very new article like this (you tagged it for deletion 13 minutes after creation), doing a google search or google news search before tagging is helpful to see if there's hope for establishing notability. The gnews search shows this would probably survive an AfD discussion. HTH-- Fabrictramp | talk to me 10:48, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi! I notice that you've jumped right in to Wikipedia in the deletion end of it. While there's nothing wrong with that per se, I strongly encourage you to spend some time building content first, so that you can gain a little better understanding of what is and is not valuable content, and how mediocre or unsourced content can be salvaged and improved. If you do insist on participating strictly through the removal of content, please be more thorough in investigating topics you are considering putting up for deletion. Your recent nomination Big Science as "original research" and "made up" belies the considerable body of scholarship on the topic; Google Scholar searches are a good first step to check up on science or humanities-related topics before assuming they are simply made up content. Cheers-- ragesoss ( talk) 01:10, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
We decided to split those articles because 1: There was such a massive amount of material in the Media section and 2: To dispel confusion between the martial art techniques in the "Zui Quan" category and the media appearances. You recently merged the popular culture article back into the main article without first discussing it on the talk page. Please allow for the articles to be separated again. Thank you for your time. NJMauthor ( talk) 19:33, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello member of Category:Wikipedians who use IRC! You are invited to join an ongoing discussion on Wikipedia talk:IRC/wikipedia-en-help aimed at defining a policy for prerequisites to being a helper in the "#wikipedia-en-help connect" channel in a section titled "New helper policy".
To prevent future mailings about IRC, you may remove your user page from
Category:Wikipedians who use IRC.
Assistance is available upon request if you can't figure out where it is being added to your user page.
This message has been sent by
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 11:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC) on behalf of — {{U|
Technical 13}} (
e •
t •
c)
What are your opinions of it? Fuel of the future? 74.12.182.15 ( talk) 08:33, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
I have done some basic work on the Zack Bazzi article, but it is far from complete. As I mentioned, I am not in a position to complete it myself. Others, including Zack, could add more details to the article and make it more informative. In the meantime, I feel I have included enough info to make the case for the notability of Zack. As such, I would like to invite you to re-examine the article and consider removing the "delete" tag. With14ever ( talk) 10:39, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
|
Just a friendly note on a couple of your speedy deletion requests that I just declined. On Ann Maartmann, the article specifically said she's a popular singer, which is a claim of importance, so it's not eligible for an A7 speedy deletion. Prod or AfD would be the way to go on those. And tagging it for deletion 2 minutes after it was created is considered bitey by many Wikipedians.
On Zack Bazzi, the Keith Olbermann, BBC and NPR references are enough of a claim of importance to avoid speedy deletion. Again, prod or AfD is the way to go on this. Additionally, with a very new article like this (you tagged it for deletion 13 minutes after creation), doing a google search or google news search before tagging is helpful to see if there's hope for establishing notability. The gnews search shows this would probably survive an AfD discussion. HTH-- Fabrictramp | talk to me 10:48, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi! I notice that you've jumped right in to Wikipedia in the deletion end of it. While there's nothing wrong with that per se, I strongly encourage you to spend some time building content first, so that you can gain a little better understanding of what is and is not valuable content, and how mediocre or unsourced content can be salvaged and improved. If you do insist on participating strictly through the removal of content, please be more thorough in investigating topics you are considering putting up for deletion. Your recent nomination Big Science as "original research" and "made up" belies the considerable body of scholarship on the topic; Google Scholar searches are a good first step to check up on science or humanities-related topics before assuming they are simply made up content. Cheers-- ragesoss ( talk) 01:10, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
We decided to split those articles because 1: There was such a massive amount of material in the Media section and 2: To dispel confusion between the martial art techniques in the "Zui Quan" category and the media appearances. You recently merged the popular culture article back into the main article without first discussing it on the talk page. Please allow for the articles to be separated again. Thank you for your time. NJMauthor ( talk) 19:33, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello member of Category:Wikipedians who use IRC! You are invited to join an ongoing discussion on Wikipedia talk:IRC/wikipedia-en-help aimed at defining a policy for prerequisites to being a helper in the "#wikipedia-en-help connect" channel in a section titled "New helper policy".
To prevent future mailings about IRC, you may remove your user page from
Category:Wikipedians who use IRC.
Assistance is available upon request if you can't figure out where it is being added to your user page.
This message has been sent by
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 11:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC) on behalf of — {{U|
Technical 13}} (
e •
t •
c)