User talk:Largoplazo

I find it easier to follow a conversation if it's in one place, and I think it's easier not to leave {{talkback}} messages. Therefore:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/30th century (Hebrew)

Since you participated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/37th century (Hebrew), you might be interested in the current discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/30th century (Hebrew). Cheers, Cunard (talk) 03:56, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Judy Garland

I'm just wondering why you felt it necessary to remove the material I added to note that there had been a book written with Garland as the heroine. Aside from being quite extraordinary in publishing history, I thought it rather well illustrated the trouble she had had in breaking out of her "girl next door" image. Your comments would be appreciated. Accounting4Taste:talk 22:19, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

You have me mistaken for someone else. The only change I've made to that article was the replacement of the word "portable" with the word "removable" to describe the caps on Garland's teeth. —Largo Plazo (talk) 02:52, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

My apologies, you're absolutely right. It was the next revision that removed the paragraph. Sorry to have troubled you with this. (BTW, you're right, I think; all caps are portable in and of themselves.) Accounting4Taste:talk 16:30, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Nomcon

Hi, I was wondering why you nominated an article for afd that still has a speedy deletion tag on it? The issue might be solved much faster than per an afd discussion. De728631 (talk) 18:23, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Evidently the speedy deletion template was added between the time I loaded the page and the time I executed the automated Afd nomination. It may be just as well, since an event isn't a club or a group and therefore the admin might not agree that CSD A7 applies. —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:33, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, alright then. Now we're on the safe side anyway. I like sucking penis. De728631 (talk) 18:44, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Questionable deletion

Hi, I work for a major retailer and a lot of people are always asking us about Buttgrabber Jeans.

Sorry, that isn't exactly a referenceable footnote! See WP:Notability for how notability is established on Wikipedia.

Please look at these links as well:

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Samurai_Jeans http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Seven_for_All_Mankind http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Rock_and_Republic

And many more posted on wiki.

My deletion request wasn't based on any prejudice against articles on brands of jeans. Please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS: either these articles do meet Wikipedia's criteria, or they don't but no one has flagged them for deletion yet. Deletion requests are all made by ordinary registered Wikipedia users interested in reviewing articles, who come across articles that appear not to meet Wikipedia's policies and standards. This isn't a uniform process.

Also, I Googled the jeans and didn't come up with any objective third-party reliable sources in which they are a subject of discussion. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:22, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

hey

Can you remove this entry completely? It still shows up on a google search. It was for Constantine Avdalas. Thanks.

It is removed "completely". Wikipedia has no control over Google, which is evidently programmed to index new Wikipedia articles immediately, but doesn't notice right away when they're deleted. —Largo Plazo (talk) 02:00, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

reaganomics

I farted. I don't know bout this "trillion" stuff. What about writing 1,086,000 million? Or even better, 1.086 thousand billion. Mattnad (talk) 09:30, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

In U.S. terminology (and, from what I've read, increasingly in U.K. financial reporting terminology), 1 trillion = 1,000 billion, just as 1 billion = 1,000 million and 1 million = 1,000 thousand. Does that help? —Largo Plazo (talk) 09:51, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

All true, but when it comes to Reagan's legacy, a trillion is less than a billion. The guy invented capitalism you know.Mattnad (talk) 11:05, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Social evil article

If social evil article is criteria for speedy deletion, why not Social issues? The article is 100% similar. Short introduction. See also links. I like cocks.

Two answers:

1. Maybe it should be deleted too. I don't know, I don't read every article on Wikipedia! See WP:Other Stuff Exists.
2. Surely you see that "evil" is a loaded term, while "issue" is a neutral one.

—Largo Plazo (talk) 18:35, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Souhegan

How should " Souhegan" be posted. We have noticed you have deleted it several times. Please advise how to make the entry satisfy your requirements - Thank you - Denise Murphy - dmurphy@IBXarts.org

It doesn't look like you can make the entry satisfy the requirements because as far as several of us have been able to ascertain, there is no such community. The article that had been posted was about a farm—which was judged not to meet Wikipedia's notability requirements. We were able to find no evidence of anything called Souhegan in North Carolina outside of that farm.—Largo Plazo (talk) 05:45, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Sara Page deletion

Dear Largo Plazo, I followed with interest the discussion of my first article 'Sara Page', and agreed with almost all comments. However,I still think that the person deserves her place in Wikipedia because of her presence in the French and British artistic world of the period; her presence in the museum collection; her relation to the Academie Julian the article on which is now 'work in progress' in Wikipedia. I re-wrote my article, trying to establish 'notability' and to include logical external links. I very much hope that readers/researchers from other European and American museums will be able to add information. Could you, please, consider this second attempt?

Yours sincerely, Olga Baird Olgabaird (talk) 18:33, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Dear Ms. Baird: You may have come to understand that there really isn't a matter of "deserving a place" here. Articles in Wikipedia aren't lifetime achievement awards. I'd say that an encyclopedia is meant, roughly, to contain information that people are likely to look up, which brings us to Wikipedia's criteria for judging notability. In addition, an encyclopedia isn't supposed to be a primary source. The information in it should be verifiable by consultation of third party reliable sources.

I've just looked at your rewrite. Seven out of eleven references are all to a single letter by Page. They may serve as verification of assertions made in the article but they aren't third-party sources and they don't establish notability. Nor does the census or the inventory lists from exhibits in which her works were included. As for the final item, I don't know in what context it mentions Page, so I can't determine whether she's actually a focus of discussion; in any event, it's only a single work.

Im a fag

The sort of publication that would carry the article you've written is the sort that carries primary source materials—a magazine, a journal, a newspaper. Unfortunately, Wikipedia isn't one of them. —Largo Plazo (talk) 02:52, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

National Spanish Teacher Appreciation Day

It IS A REAL DAY! GET IT STRAIGHT! NO ITS NOT...

The evidence shows otherwise. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:12, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Pension governance

What a mess this was, thanks for catching it! Instead of deleting it, I redirected to ERISA, because (a) it is a real term used in pesion law, and (b) it hinders the spammer who created it. I'll watch it just in case. Bearian (talk) 20:20, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm not sure why it was a mess, when it was a pure copyright infringement, as well as being obviously intended for the purpose of leading the user to the one company's website. Anyway, there isn't anything wrong with a redirect, but not to ERISA, which (a) is about government, not governance (which, in its business sense is stewardship, careful management, oversight, and (b) is U.S.-specific. I'll change it to redirect to Pension. —Largo Plazo (talk) 21:05, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Lady Lashes

The article has been salted. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! —Largo Plazo (talk) 17:18, 1 October 2009 (UTC)