User talk:RandomXYZb/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 15

Foreign language pages

Hi. You recently tagged Khemupsorn Sirisukha as nonsense. Please note that WP:CSD specifically states that foreign language pages are not speediable under this criteria. They should be tagged as needing translation instead. If you read this language and can determine that it meets a CSD criteria, it can be helpful to note that in the edit summary. Natalie (talk) 17:56, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Vunet

I changed the speedy tag you placed on this article to A1. The article doesn't really fall under spam as it's not advertising anything really. It almost seems to be more of nonsense than anything else. A^RendedWinter 20:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. I'm completely not sure now. I think this is one of those times we need a 'What is this article even about' tags. If you think it would be better left as spam tagged, by all means change it back. A^RendedWinter 21:07, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Right right then. I guess we'll just have to see what happens! A^RendedWinter 21:12, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Question about creating a new wiki page.

I recently tried creating a new wiki page and had it deleted almost immediately due to advertising. I have a new company that I have started and would like to have it listed on wiki. What would be the best way of going about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcapler (talk • contribs) 22:34, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Derek Masters

Piles, how dare you delete my informative biography of Derek Masters, can you please refrain from doing so in the future! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alice Street (talk • contribs) 13:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

"Piles"? Hmmm. I've given her some advice on her talkpage; some advice on WP:CIVIL will follow it now I've seen that little gem. (and the one below, edit conflicted) Tonywalton  | Talk 13:59, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

1. I apologise for being so accusatory 2. But I do not apologise for my love of quantum physics 3. It is my life and I do not consider it being inaproppriate to create a page dedicated to the man I love! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alice Street (talk • contribs)

Piles

Yeah, with a name like "Walton" I got "Johnboy" and "wally" a lot, when I was about 10. Not the point - WP:CIVIL applies to everybody. This editor mentions she's not had one contribution accepted at all - let's see if I can get her to improve her record! Cheers Tonywalton  | Talk 14:05, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:DFTT ;-) I'm keeping an eye out and dusting off the blockstick. Tonywalton  | Talk 14:15, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Maytableinc

I seriously considered listing it for a speedy, but I didn't know what speedy category it falls under. Corvus cornix_talk 21:50, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I thought about db-nn, but decided to let more eyes see it. I'm not unhappy with the db tagging, I can live with it. Corvus cornix_talk 21:52, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

speedies

Giles, you really should be just a little more careful. Please read WP:DP and WP:CSD in detail--the wording there is exact, and the limits must be followed. Any claim to notability that could possibly be asserted in good faith is enough to pass speedy,even tho it has not much chance of passing afd. if you think the notability insufficient, use PROD or Afd. But the claim to have written one more books published by an actual publisher is ann assertion of notability. (the idea is that the books might just actually be important, and this is better told by having a number of people look at it.) And only some classes of things can be speedied for lack of notability. It does not include schools--high schools are usually considered notable & always defended at Afd, so there's no point in using Prod, just AfD if you think it hopeless. for elementary and intermediate schools, use Prod.

CEOs and Chairmen of major companies are usually considered notable. Political parties if real are usually notable. any claim to being one goes to AfD or Prod.

No context can not be used for an article whose content you think unimportant, just if it is really impossible to figure out what its about.

Using G11 for the academic departments is stretching it a little, but i think it was OK for those two particular articles--and such departments are never considered notable, but dont fit into speedy for notability. Almost all such articles are copyvios, so you might look for that first.

I and other admins have been declining more than half of your speedies. Please stop now, read the rules, ands start again tomorrow slowly. Patrolling is good, but please do it carefully or it just makes more work for us, and WP:BITEs the newcomers. DGG (talk) 22:18, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

response

OK, I was just looking at the most recent, declining one-fourth is closer. I apologize for over-statement. Of course, you should aim at having none of them overturned--obviously, there will be difference of opinion, so nobody actually gets it really down to zero--if only because articles do get improved, as you rightly say on my talk p. From Wikipedia:Deletion policy, it's better to err on the side of slower deletion. Unjustified deletion is unfair to newbies. Yes, you have explained when asked, but not always quite correctly. If it looks like good faith or even an immature new editor, some of us try to give at first a few words of personal advice in addition to the template or sometimes in place of it. It can help prevent unrealistic hangons.

I'm not warning you away, just suggesting you re-read the criteria first. Don't just go by what I say they are in a quick note. A great deal of time has been spent on the exact wording, and discussed in the talk page archives there. Feel free to go back when you're ready. DGG (talk) 22:48, 30 November 2007 (UTC)