Jump to content

Talk:Chaundon

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notice: This article does not verifiably establish WP:MUSIC

[edit]

In my opinion, this article either does not verifiably satisfy the Notability criteria for Music, or it may violate the Conflict of interest guideline, or perhaps it is a Copyright violation.

Untitled

[edit]

Wikipedia articles must be based on reliable sources to verify any claims of notability. Even though the lack of reliable sources in an article is not grounds for deletion in itself, an article with absolutely no sources (or only external links to unreliable ones) suggests to some editors that multiple reliable sources may not, in fact, exist. Although I am considering tagging this article for deletion according to the Deletion policy, I am nonetheless willing to assist User:Able2 (talk · contribs), and other recent contributors to this article, to make some constructive improvements to it ... I do not have time to examine this article in depth at the moment, and it may improve over time, in which case this warning was premature. Please respond on this Discussion page, instead of on my Talk page, in order to avoid fragmenting the conversation. To better understand why I have used this template, please read Flag templates for deletion warnings ... I realize that some of the expressed possible concerns may not be appropriate in this case. Happy Editing! — 72.75.82.202 (talk · contribs) 21:21, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • The problem is you can't PROD an article that's already been to AfD. You have to take it to AfD again and make your case there. PROD is for uncontroversial deletion, and obviously this would not qualify. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:22, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lipstick on a pig

[edit]

Well, if nothing else, I discovered the {{Allmusic}} template ... 

*{{allmusicguide | id=11:dzfexqlsld0e~T0 | label= Chaundon }}

gives us:

And that's as much lipstick as I feel like putting on this pig. :-) — 72.75.82.202 (talk) 21:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD, anyone?

[edit]

Hello, fellow editors ... I forgot to "delete" this one, and now that I've put a little more lipstick on it (since the WP:PROD was contested), I'm wondering if Some Other Editor agrees that it should go to WP:AfD. Comments, please? — 72.75.82.202 (talk) 20:42, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just tried to improve the article - maybe you would like to try to do the same?--Michig (talk) 20:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I did do some (cosmetic) "Monkish" WikiGnome stuff … see the 6th Step of Protocol to minimize friction from proposed and speedy deletions (assume good faith, etc.), but honestly, that's as much lipstick as I felt like putting on this pig … OTOH, through the diligence of Some Other Editors, this article got rescued, so I'm a Happy Camper. :-) — 72.75.82.202 (talk) 21:03, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Thanks. That's a lot more than some editors would do, particularly with hip-hop related articles. Personally I would add a step zero to the above-referenced protocol which suggests spending a couple of minutes searching for evidence of notability before even proposing deletion. Having said that, a lot of hip-hop oriented editors don't help by creating poor unsourced articles. --Michig (talk) 21:11, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I feel that I'm making a "contribution" by bringing it to the attention of Some Other Editor, even if I don't fix it myself … that's why I created Category:Flagged articles. :-) And if nothing else, I learned something new ({{allmusicguide}}) — 72.75.82.202 (talk) 21:55, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot to mention … "spending a couple of minutes searching for evidence of notability before even proposing deletion" is what you do after you flag the article, when you have more time to devote to it, before you decide to fix it or get rid of it … it's either damaged or broken, and one can be repaired, but the other cannot … don't spend a lot of time on it when you first encounter it … flag it for later, when you're maybe in a different frame of mind … and there is always the possibility that Some Other Editor will "adopt" the article and improve it overnight, once it's been flagged. — 72.75.82.202 (talk) 22:49, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Flagging isn't a problem - trouble is some editors use CSD and PROD as flags when they see a problem with an article.--Michig (talk) 06:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As with all paradigm shifts, there is inertia to be overcome … hopefully, more editors will become aware of {{Flag-article}} and {{Flag-editor}} as an alternative, and we'll see fewer hasty WP:CSDs and WP:PRODs. — 72.75.82.202 (talk) 06:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Flagged articles

[edit]

I have removed the [[Category:Flagged articles]] from the message above … the current version is a great improvement, and it looks Just Fine to me … Happy Editing! — 72.75.82.202 (talk · contribs) 21:16, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Chaundon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Chaundon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:20, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chaundon&oldid=1257413792"