User talk:Archeologo (Museo Galileo)

Welcome

Hello, Archeologo (Museo Galileo), and welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! OnionRing (talk) 15:48, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Department directory Help directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our new user help forum, the Teahouse Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Speedy deletion nomination of Caspar Rauber

Hello Archeologo (Museo Galileo),

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Caspar Rauber for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Jppcap (talk) 16:40, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please slow down

Hello AMG. I've noticed that you're creating a large number of short, unreferenced articles, often about subjects for which notability isn't made clear. Can I ask you to please slow down, and concentrate on creating fewer, better articles, rather than a mountain of unreferenced one-line stubs. You might find WP:Your first article useful for this. Thanks, OnionRing (talk) 17:15, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Galileo's telescopes

Hello Archeologo (Museo Galileo),

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Galileo's telescopes for deletion, because it seems to be copied from another source.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to rewrite it in your own words, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Lithopsian (talk) 20:13, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see the OTRS now. I'll try to remove the speedy deletion myself, otherwise any admin who comes along should get directed to the OTRS notice and reject my deletion request. Unfortunately then I will have to decorate the article with tags, because it has no attribution or citations. Or categories, or other articles linking to it. In short, it is the sort of article that in normal circumstances would be a candidate for deletion anyway. Possibly some thought up front about how to best construct the Museo Galileo articles would save a lot of grief down the road. I see another article has been tagged for speedy deletion, and it probably won't be the last. Perhaps a template? A wikilink to a page about this project? And of course suitable attribution and citations to establish notability and verifiability. Lithopsian (talk) 21:10, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please learn the basics

As a Wikipedian in Residence, I would have hoped that you would know the basics of writing Wikipedia articles. Please slow down and learn how to get things right. I see you have created a number of unsourced stubs, such as Lorenzo Batecin and Caspar Rauber, which show no evidence that the person was WP:NOTABLE. Every article needs to have sources, from the very start. You have also linked a lot of dates: in English Wikipedia we do not link dates, either years or centuries, as you have done in these stubs. (See WP:YEARLINK) Please go back and unlink all your dates. Thanks. PamD 22:36, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please also note, in relation to Lorenzo Batecin, that the same term should not be linked more than once in an article, or sometimes in a section: 16th century should not be linked once here, but should even more certainly not be linked twice in consecutive sentences. Please get some basic Wikipedia training on how to contribute to the encyclopedia, as a matter of urgency, before you create many more articles in this WiR position. Thanks. PamD 22:41, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just another small point: if we don't know someone's birth date we write "(died 1733)" not "(?-1733)" as you did at Daniel Delander. I can't quite find this written down anywhere but I'm 99% sure I'm right. PamD 23:12, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But well done for adding Henry Sutton (instrument-maker) to the disambiguation page at Henry Sutton! It's often forgotten, when editors create a new article with a title with a disambiguation. Thanks. PamD 23:16, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please also note that Wikipedia articles are written in complete sentences. Even with the OTRS permission to copy text from your museum's database, you should check the text you are adding to make sure that it meets Wikipedia's standards. See Charles François Delamarche, where your text includes three non-sentences. Please stop sacrificing quality to quantity: you created a large number of stubs in six hours today, but they contain a large number of problems which either you, or some other volunteer editor, will need to clean up. Before you create any more stubs, please go back over those you have created, and add proper references, unlink the dates, and fix up any text which is not written in proper sentences. Thanks. There is a lot to learn about editing Wikipedia, but it is an interesting journey. Please slow down and take time to get things right. Thanks. PamD 23:26, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Lorenzo Batecin

The article Lorenzo Batecin has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of notability: almost all that is said about this person is that nothing is known about him, and no sources are offered which even confirm his existence.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. PamD 22:38, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Vittorio Crosten

added links pointing to Frames and Drawer

Astatic needles

added a link pointing to Polarities

Candido Del Buono

added a link pointing to Chamberlain

Charles François Delamarche

added a link pointing to Copernican system

Ferdinando Cesarini

added a link pointing to Letter

François Barrois

added a link pointing to Provost

Gaspero Mazzeranghi

added a link pointing to Instrument makers

Georg Friedrich Brander

added a link pointing to Augusta

Gualterus Arsenius

added a link pointing to Louvain

Latino di Camillo Orsini

added a link pointing to Candia

Santucci's Armillary Sphere

added a link pointing to Sirens

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:10, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Michael Bümel

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Michael Bümel requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. PamD 15:29, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Acquarzente

Hello Archeologo (Museo Galileo),

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Acquarzente for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. $Tushi Talk To Me$ 10:15, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Generalising

If you create further articles please remember to make them appropriate for a general encyclopedia rather than one museum's catalogue. I've just edited Paolo Contarini to treat his three surviving instruments equally, where your version was text used in your own museum. Thanks. PamD 05:58, 30 September 2016 (UTC) PamD 05:58, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jovilabe

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Jovilabe requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://catalogue.museogalileo.it/object/Jovilabe.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Wikishovel (talk) 14:03, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation

Your addition to Middle finger of Galileo's right hand has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:53, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

STOP what you are doing. You are introducing copyrighted text into Wikipedia without proof of release. If you persist in doing this, you may be blocked from editing. We can not accept this material. STOP NOW. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:56, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! This is not a copyviol: there is an OTRS permit in the talk page. I worked at the Museo Galileo as a Wikipedian in Residence. Please, visit Wikipedia:GLAM/Museo_Galileo for more information. --Archeologo (Museo Galileo) (talk) 14:56, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Fair enough, and I hereby retract my warning. However, doing an entire catalogue dump of this museum is inappropriate. The redirect on Galileo's finger needs to remain. It's already mentioned in the main article which it redirects too. I think you need to pause with your creations and consult others before continuing. Please. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:58, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - This is not an entire catalogue, but a selection of items (as you can see on the OTRS permit). The Galileo's finger is a different obejct (it has its own area of the museum) and I mean it deserve a different page of Wikipedia. --Archeologo (Museo Galileo) (talk) 15:00, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - Fine. Produce secondary sources that attest to the notability of this subject being so notable that it needs its own article. Look, there's real problems here. I appreciate the work you are doing trying to get this material into Wikipedia. However, these individual objects being stand alone articles is highly questionable. I think it would be a very good idea to pause and seek some input from others regarding these stand alone article creations. Just because these objects exist in a museum does not mean they are independently notable. I'd recommend Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) as a starting point. Normally, we'd direct people to WP:AFC, but that project is intensely backlogged and unlikely to every be un-backlogged. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:06, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - As a case example, I randomly picked an article creation of yours from June; Paolo Contarini. "No biographical information is known on this priest from Noto, in Sicily" So, we have nothing except he was a priest, an instrument maker, and he's from Noto. The only reference is to the museum for which you are doing work. Doing a google search returns almost nothing about him independent of your museum and Wikipedia. This article likely should never have been created.
    - There may be a great many articles like this that will require massive cleanup even if they are retained. We need to take a step back and evaluate what you are doing, and come up with a good way to move forward. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:12, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      - The object list is almost complete (only bios remain): if you check on the Italian versions, every item has an academic bibliography which attest that notability. Of course, they are Italian texts: this is the reason why the Museum staff will update my pages with an English bibliography, as soon as possible. In addiction to this, most of the pages have other language independent versions (French, Portugues, Russian): I mean this is not an authomatic reason to keep the pages, but it could help to understand their notability. Of course, I know that is not reasonable that any object in a museum should have its own item on Wikipedia, but this is not that kind of matter. And most of the pages I created are about "kind of items", not as specific objects. In any case, thanks for your positive help. --Archeologo (Museo Galileo) (talk) 15:14, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      - About the specific question (Paolo Contarini), on the Italian wikipedia we have no problem to keep that kind of pages. Maybe it's different on en.wiki, but it depends on every case. --Archeologo (Museo Galileo) (talk) 15:15, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Paolo Contarini; WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS doesn't mean we should have it here. Each Wikipedia sets its own standards, even on such things as copyrighted works.

Re: notability of various objects; if they are notable, then provide references that indicate that. As you note, we can't just accept they are notable because other projects have articles on them.

I keep finding problems. You just created Elastic and inelastic collisions apparatus. Problem? It's not the only such device of this type. This is why doing a catalogue dump, even a limited one, is problematic. The museum's view of their collections is understandably (and I don't mean to be pejorative here) biased. It's great you are doing this work. But, we have to process it, synthesize it, analyze it and determine how best to put it into Wikipedia. Just taking elements of the museum's collections and dumping there is not the way forward.

Please, I beg of you. Pause, and let's start a conversation in a public fora to better understand how to proceed here. I don't have all the answers, but I do see lots of problems. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:20, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And now another problem article at Giovan Battista Verle; "Little information is available about Giovan Battista Verle". Ok, then why do we have an article about him? Because he built an anatomical model of an eye? Was this eye notable somehow? Did it change science? Did it have a significant effect on the development of ophthalmology? As is, this article is a near candidate for speedy deletion. The only thing that gives me pause would be to better understand how this model was somehow significant, making him famous for it. Outside of that, there's nothing here. We need to pause. PLEASE pause. PLEASE. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:28, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Given that other editors have expressed significant concerns regarding your editing here, given that this advice has apparently been unheeded, given that I've asked you to pause and you continued creating problematic articles, I'm upping this to a final warning of sorts. I really, really appreciate the work you are trying to do here. But, the manner in which it is being done is improper. If you continue to create new articles I will be forced to take this further in dispute resolution, specifically reporting this to WP:AN/I. Please, I again beg of you; stop. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:33, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Hammersoft: someone in your position needs to be either much more experienced as a Wikipedian, or show a capability and willingness to learn the standards of the particular Wikipedia they are editing. If not, as seems to be the case at the moment, then your time and the institution's time & resources are/will be wasted. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 15:36, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, that's why I stopped 20 minutes ago. Please don't send message anymore. I'm managing it with the Museum staff. Thanks for your help. --Archeologo (Museo Galileo) (talk) 15:39, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

With respect, the museum staff would certainly be helpful in moving forward, but they are not the people you need to be communicating with. I strongly urge you to begin a discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) before continuing with any creations. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:41, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, having just tidied up a batch of Archaeologo's articles, I can confirm that they are uniformly in need of linking, formatting, and referencing. Quite often they will need to be merged or redirected to existing articles, or else substantiated with sufficient reliable sources to justify independent articles. This is clearly a great pity, as we could use the help of museum experts, but cut-and-paste from museum labels doesn't work for a variety of reasons, OTRS or no. Thus Quadrans Vetus needed to be about the class-of-instruments, of which 3 survive, not about the one that happens to be in Florence. In other words, all the articles need to be turned inside out and made encyclopedic, with no special focus on the Museo Galileo. We'd welcome input from Archaeologo and his institution, but that requires some appreciation of the role and structure of Wikipedia. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:27, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Paolo Contarini

The article Paolo Contarini has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Contarini is not notable; only available source is the one given, and it states that nothing is known of this man. An article is simply not justified.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:29, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Frog thermometer

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Frog thermometer requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://catalogo.museogalileo.it/oggetto/TermometroRanocchietta.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Killer Moff (talk) 10:38, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Galilean compound microscope

The article Galilean compound microscope has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not every item made/owned by Galileo deserves a page.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Winged Blades^Godric 04:55, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Galileo's objective lens

The article Galileo's objective lens has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Why every object made/owned by Galileo is notable?

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Winged Blades^Godric 04:58, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Galilean compound microscope for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Galilean compound microscope is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Galilean compound microscope until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Winged Blades^Godric 11:23, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Giovan Battista Verle for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Giovan Battista Verle is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giovan Battista Verle until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Winged Blades^Godric 13:01, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Vittorio Crosten for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Vittorio Crosten is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vittorio Crosten until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Winged Blades^Godric 13:51, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Girolamo della Volpaia for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Girolamo della Volpaia is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Girolamo della Volpaia until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Winged Blades^Godric 15:03, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Candido Del Buono for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Candido Del Buono is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Candido Del Buono until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Winged Blades^Godric 15:06, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Paolo Del Buono for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paolo Del Buono is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paolo Del Buono until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Winged Blades^Godric 15:07, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Filippo De Palma for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Filippo De Palma is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Filippo De Palma until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Winged Blades^Godric 15:11, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John Cuff (optician) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Cuff (optician) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Cuff (optician) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Winged Blades^Godric 15:15, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Francesco Comelli for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Francesco Comelli is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Francesco Comelli until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Winged Blades^Godric 15:19, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Tall-stem thermometers

The article Tall-stem thermometers has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Appears to be describing one or more thermometers held in one particular museum, with no generalised information about this type of measuring instrument. Not a useful addition to the encyclopedia.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. PamD 23:42, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]