User talk:Ninham9 Gary12

Speedy deletion nomination of Ninham Shand

Hello Ninham9 Gary12,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Ninham Shand for deletion, because it seems to be vandalism or a hoax.

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. BiH (talk) 15:42, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ninham Shand

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 Ninham Shand 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 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 "Click here to 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, you can place a request here. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 15:45, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why?

Hello US1939, I see you have created yet another sockpuppet. Why do you insist on making useless stubs that others need to cleanup? PLEASE RESPOND and PLEASE STOP MAKING THESE. If you keep at it, I will file for an IP block. Ruigeroeland Ruigeroeland (talk) 16:34, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Paryphthimoides undulata

The article Paryphthimoides undulata has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable under Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline.

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. StudiesWorld (talk) 17:07, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Magneuptychia tricolor

The article Magneuptychia tricolor has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable under Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline.

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. StudiesWorld (talk) 17:10, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Magneuptychia ocypete

The article Magneuptychia ocypete has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable under Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline.

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. StudiesWorld (talk) 17:11, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Magneuptychia newtoni

The article Magneuptychia newtoni has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable under Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline.

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. StudiesWorld (talk) 17:14, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Yphthimoides renata

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.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Yphthimoides renata requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 "Click here to 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, you can place a request here. Nechlison (talk) 18:24, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Phlebodes campo

The article Phlebodes campo has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not 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. StudiesWorld (talk) 18:26, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Vettius phyllus

The article Vettius phyllus has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not 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. StudiesWorld (talk) 18:26, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Thargella caura

Hello Ninham9 Gary12,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Thargella caura for deletion, because it's too short to identify the subject of the article.

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. Nechlison (talk) 18:27, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Thargella caura

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.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Thargella caura requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 "Click here to 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, you can place a request here. Nechlison (talk) 18:28, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Autochton bipunctatus

Hello Ninham9 Gary12,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Autochton bipunctatus for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons.

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. Nechlison (talk) 18:36, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stop creating article with no notable subject

I have noticed that you are continuously creating different articles on the same subject showing no any importance to readers. All article you have created consists of no more than one sentence and many of other editors have proposed your articles for deletion before me. Please avoid doing this otherwise you will be blocked from editing. Thanks Nechlison (talk) 18:58, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I second this; you have created at least 150 articles about moths/butterflies that are not notable. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 20:05, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Your use of multiple Wikipedia accounts

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Stern review, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community. Jinkinson talk to me 19:20, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet of Stern review (talk · contribs · global contribs · page moves · user creation · block log) that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:32, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Vettius marcus

Hello Ninham9 Gary12,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Vettius marcus for deletion, because it seems to be an article that was created in violation of a block or ban. Content created by banned users will be deleted immediately.