User talk:Danny 1873

Ibrox Stadium edits

Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia.

I've left a comment at the talk page for the Ibrox article about the recent edits you made to it. I don't agree that these changes are a good idea (at least one of them is incorrect), and think these should be removed pending discussion. You're welcome to discuss those changes there. If you have any questions, let me know. Cheers. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 20:24, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Rangers F.C., did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. As the previous editor said, the statements need citations srushe (talk) 19:13, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Upper Dallachy

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Upper Dallachy, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Little info, no sources and abusive.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. srushe (talk) 11:09, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Lower auchenreath

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Lower auchenreath, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Non-notable place.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. srushe (talk) 11:09, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Alastair bisset

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 Alastair bisset 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 person or group of people, but it does not 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. WVRMad•Talk•Guestbook 14:48, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Belfast's big two

The article Belfast's big two has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no refs, no links from other sites. basically whole article original research

While all 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. Koppapa (talk) 22:01, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]