The result was Speedy Keep (bad-faith nom). — Scien tizzle 23:09, 13 November 2007 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Delete. No 'reliable, secondary coverage'. Fails WP:BIO. Fails WP:PROF. Extremely sexy 19:18, 13 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Greetings, I find it ironic that almost all of the articles listed as created by user Brown-Haired Girl are either UNSOURCED or poorly sourced: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrownHairedGirl/Contribs-2006-05 For example, Not a SINGLE source for this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Craig_%28Irish_Professor%29 Someone should nominate this deletion, and tag the others as 'unreferenced'. Fair is fair. Play by the rules, if you are enforcing them on others. Regards Moderator
There are many other similar emails on that mailing list, mostly under a thread starting at http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Worlds_Oldest_People/message/9065 -- the latest email gives advice on how to join wikipedia to participate in the AfDs listed by Robert Young, with advice such as "Look, it is good to be 'active' and establish yourself first, with a user page and ID, before going to 'vote.'"
It seems that the nominator just took the email, and didn't even do his own checks to see if the article was sourced. Not a good idea. :( -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 20:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was Speedy Keep (bad-faith nom). — Scien tizzle 23:09, 13 November 2007 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Delete. No 'reliable, secondary coverage'. Fails WP:BIO. Fails WP:PROF. Extremely sexy 19:18, 13 November 2007 (UTC) reply
Greetings, I find it ironic that almost all of the articles listed as created by user Brown-Haired Girl are either UNSOURCED or poorly sourced: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrownHairedGirl/Contribs-2006-05 For example, Not a SINGLE source for this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Craig_%28Irish_Professor%29 Someone should nominate this deletion, and tag the others as 'unreferenced'. Fair is fair. Play by the rules, if you are enforcing them on others. Regards Moderator
There are many other similar emails on that mailing list, mostly under a thread starting at http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Worlds_Oldest_People/message/9065 -- the latest email gives advice on how to join wikipedia to participate in the AfDs listed by Robert Young, with advice such as "Look, it is good to be 'active' and establish yourself first, with a user page and ID, before going to 'vote.'"
It seems that the nominator just took the email, and didn't even do his own checks to see if the article was sourced. Not a good idea. :( -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 20:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC) reply