User talk:Nuttah68

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Samsung SCH-u520

I noticed you tagged the SCH-u520 for speedy deletion. Thankfully another user saw no need for deletion, as I also saw no need, and the tag was removed by the user before me. Please be aware that other articles for specific phone models exist, and outline the same things as in my article. I am sorry if it appeared as an advertisement to you. It is a just-to-the facts article. It outlines exactly what the phone does and nothing more.

Thanks, ptcfast2 13:56, 25 January 2007 (EST) I agree Choppie3000 22:43, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] HIDING WITH GIRLS

  • Has gone on an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one large or medium-sized country,[1] reported in notable and verifiable sources.

Toured with: Mad Capsule Markets, Sikth,


  • Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable).

- released album on Mighty Atom Funeral for a friend


  • Has been featured in multiple non-trivial published works in reliable and reputable media (excludes things like school newspapers, personal blogs, etc...).

featured in Kerrang (biggest selling weekly music magazine in the world) on numerous occassions, Metal Hammer, Terrorizor, Rock Sound and many more

  • Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast on a national radio network.

-recoreded a Radio One Session


thanks for trying, but know about what you are talking about next time :) thanks anyway, people like you make Wikipedia SO GOOD...thanks you rock..thanks

[edit] Just a note

When writing comments on different pages, don't forget to sign by pressing shift + #, 4 times. Many people would like to see who left the commen and then they can telll you whether they agree with you or not. Simply south 19:03, 5 May 2006 (UTC)


Dickens lived in Wish Street, Southsea in 1813. Wish street only existed between 1810 & 1867, when it gave way to other housing development. However it was in Southsea as it in between the area of green street/landport terrace (i.e below winston Churchill Ave) so maybe he should be in? Ben 20:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome

Hello, Nuttah68, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

In regards to the article Personal Terminal, which you proposed for deletion, I have marked the article for speedy deletion, as I feel that the article meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion. In cases where it applies, speedy deletion is preferable to proposed deletion. I have left the {{prod}} tag in place, so that if speedy deletion is rejected, your proposed deletion will remain in place. Thanks!

Again, welcome!  Mangojuicetalk 14:02, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portsmouth capacity

Hello Nuttah68. I noticed you changed the capacity of Portsmouth's ground on the Darlington Arena page. I got 19,179 from Sky Sport's website. Where did you get 20,220? Cheers. Curtholr.

The info comes from PFC, although the highest attendance at Fratton Park appears to have been 20,240 this season. Nuttah68 16:48, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jeffrey Nielsen

I noticed you marked the article for speedy deletion. Please note that the article is now internally linked to 2 other established wiki articles. You entered the scene as the article was in progress. However, if you know how to fix the capitalization of Nielsen, that would be greatly appreciated.

As the topic of same sex marriage is a very hot topic in the US, the number of professors or others who lose their jobs over the issue is growing. Greenw47 13:10, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Southwick

I wondered for a moment where on earth the HMS Dyrad link had gone! But tried the Southwick House and found it all. Just wanted to say it was a good edit and new article. It was one I was going to do when I got around to it. I think I have a good piccy of it that I can add when I get time. As its Grade 2 listed it can be added List of historic houses in England Category and maybe a defence site list (if there is such a thing) Ben 17:27, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Palmerston

I had never heard of Palmerston forts before. I am uncertain about the best form for the title of the main article. There is a strong precedent in Martello tower. I will leave it to you but whatever you decide, there will be double redirects needing to be fixed: special:whatlinkshere/Palmerston fort. -- RHaworth 18:37, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

The forts collectively are known as Palmerston Forts (both capitalised) as they are those planned during Palmerstons period as Premier, as opposed to Martello towers that are named after their designer. If I switch the redirect back to Palmerston fort and article back to Palmerston Forts there should be no double redirects Nuttah68 19:05, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Council Make Up

Even when a council has NOC in terms of its overall membership, it may well be that a single party effectively runs it. This may be clearly apparent where there is a Leader and Cabinet system, as in Portsmouth where the Cabinet are all Lib Dems (and the Infobox does say "Executive" rather than "Control", which I think makes clear what is implied). It is less obvious where there is an old style committee system, as in Gosport, but in this case the Conservatives have taken all the programme committee chairs, and hold exactly half of the council seats, so I think it is fair to say they are in fact running it. "Control" may not be quite the right word to use but I can't off-hand think of a better which will fit: "Effective control" would be rather too long, I think.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 12:55, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Fair comment (although in Portsmouth's case I think they have stood the intent of the Local Government Act 2000 on its head - the Executive is supposed to get on and, er, execute, while the full council sets budgets and general objectives). Be that as it may, how about if I tag "(minority)" on after the alleged controlling party in these instances? There is a further subtlety where a party holds exactly half the seats AND the casting vote of a Mayor or Chairman, when it really can force through decisions without cross-party agreement (but the press still reports this as NOC) - I think these should NOT be tagged as minority.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 13:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Liphook

I removed Liphook from the list as it is not a town. It has no town council, no market and no sign of ever having had a town charter. Even our article on it states "Liphook is a large village in Hampshire, England." Warofdreams talk 14:58, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

No. Can I repeat that Liphook does not meet *any* criterion for being a town. It is not a town. Warofdreams talk 13:44, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
I've copied our discussion to Talk:List of towns in England and have replied to you there, in order that the more general points you have raised can best be discussed. Warofdreams talk 22:42, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Greater Portsmouth

Denmead is not part of the Greater Portsmouth area as defined by the ONS. Denmead is not part of Waterlooville (although it has a Waterlooville postal address). The Greater Portsmouth area does not all use the 023 dialling code. Can you remove these please. Nuttah68 14:09, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Please see the reply to this on my talk page. --I'll bring the food 14:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Very well I've dealt with some of your concerns. However as Waterlooville is part of the ONS's classification of Greater Portsmouth Area, and Denmead is in the same postal area, one would assume it is covered, as it is in the same technical area. As in the same way Leigh Park is in havant.--I'll bring the food 14:19, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
I was already aware of that yesterday when I read the page's district info, however it does not change the fact that all Denmead homes have "Waterlooville" in the address and that all Denmead homes have 023 92 phone numbers. Denmead homes are also in the portsmouth phone book. Winchester is the political district in charge of the parish, not the actual area Denmead is in. In the same vein the new political seat Meon upper valley will have Havant in it, despite the Meon being a totally different area of Hampshire. The Meon is totally different by actual location and yet politically it is not.--I'll bring the food 14:24, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Can you actually link to the information definining Either the Greater portsmouth area, or the portsmouth urban area?--I'll bring the food 14:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
I know you value Hant's website as a form of acceptable source as you ascertained on a talk page with another person that:
"Hampshire County Council, a higher tier of government, recognises Liphook as a town as I have shown. Liphook has held markets since the 1600s until recently. It has held a fair and carnival annually since the same time. How much more do you want?"
Well, Hampshire County council recognises Denmead as a village within Waterlooville: [1]. How much more proof do you want? ;)--I'll bring the food 15:00, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Linking to the source directly is not an issue, tell me where to go in the geography section of the site and we will rewrite the article adding in that Denmead is not covered and I will probably be able to add more depth to the article. This is not an issue. Although it is now clear Denmead is in Waterlooville in everything minus Political geography (which seems to be based on outdated history of the area - see addition to Denmead article if you're interested).--I'll bring the food 15:22, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Well I didn't say it was north west, You are right, that needs altering. The history is not copy-vio because i have reworded it slightly.--I'll bring the food 15:51, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] speedy tag removal explanation

I felt like I had to remove the "speedy delete" tag that you placed on Missjackie69. The article does assert her importance. Now, whether or not you agree with that assertion is a whole other matter. If you still feel like the article needs to be removed, you might want to place it on "Articles for deletion". Joyous! | Talk 19:21, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] squad box

the official site. The squad numbers are current. As soon as new ones come out (soon) then it can be editted. Note every other club in the entire premiership has one with numbers from last season. SenorKristobbal 19:33, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

note keene is a mistake. It linked to Kiely anyway, I have fixed it. SenorKristobbal 19:37, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I've already explained about Keene. I suggest you try and be grateful for hard work rather than be rude about the numbers. Yes if you feel a point has to be made then make it but there is no need for the attitude you have taken. The official site numbers are all we have for now. This will be updated when squad numbers are out. This simply brings portsmouth up to date with the rest of the premiership. SenorKristobbal 19:45, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry -- No one likes Nuttah, other Wikipedia users suspect he may still be a virgin :(!

Its just not nice having just made it and spending a lot of time on it to be immediately told how wrong it is without any praise at all. I have removed the 4 but as I have already said Portsmouth are the last team in the Premiership to have a squad template I was simply bringing them up to speed, I don't even support them. Feel free to make any edits yourself particularly when the numbers are announced. I'll do it myself but if you know before me you can save me a job. Don't just remove numbers for the hell of it. Many numbers will stay the same common practice for squad numbers. SenorKristobbal 20:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CSD Criteria

Hi, thanks for the note. As I'm sure you are aware, the thing with the CSD criteria for notability is that it is about asserting notability rather than the person actually being notable. The criteria also says that "only those articles where there is no remotely plausible assertion of notability should be considered". In this case, I felt that the following statement meant that there is at least a "remotely plausible assertion of notability":

"The high number of journalists, parliamentary candidates, researchers and political hacks in attendance has given the group a high profile within the Conservative Party and it is considered to be a critical group of influence within the Conservative Party.".

As such, if we follow the criteria, I'd say that it should really be PRODed or sent to AfD. Hope that clarifies my thinking, and I'd be keen to hear any more thoughts you have on this. Cheers TigerShark 21:26, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] honeybee dance language AFD

Good evening. There have been some new facts and evidence presented in the discussion since your last edit. When you have a minute, would you mind taking the time to revisit the discussion? Thanks. Rossami (talk) 22:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wekepedians

It was an invalid link. I speedily closed it and moved it to Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 August 1. Feel free to comment there. Best Regards, alphaChimp laudare 21:48, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orkney Heritage Society

{{db-bio}} was removed from Orkney Heritage Society without explanation. I restored it. --Mais oui! 22:07, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Delete as per norm?

I think you have failed to adequatly give sufficent reasoning about why the article should be delted.--Lucy-marie 13:43, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NN game?

I have to ask why you felt the article that I haven't had a chance to update all the way yet should be deleted? The article I speak of is Funeral Quest. And I have to ask, what the heck does NN game mean? This sounds like a poor reason for an article to be deleted since it doesn't say anything purposeful! Please remove this notice as I am in the midst of trying to get the article updated with even screenshots (that I am attempting to ask permission to use). Eric42 05:52, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion#Portal:Orkney

A portal created recently by Mallimak (talk • contribs) - the Orkney Portal - has been nominated for deletion. If you wish to take part in the discussion please contribute at:

Thanks. --Mais oui! 09:01, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Palmerston Forts

Hi there, I see you've done a lot of work on the Palmerston Forts article, at least choosing groupings to describe them. There's also a batch of forts as a Thames defence: some are under Chatham, others under North Thames, some not listed at all because they are south Thames but not around Chatham. How would you like these to be grouped? I don't want to mess up your system or something you have in the pipeline.

The reason for my interest is that User:Pratj is planning articles on defences in Medway, which includes Chatham, Kent but also Cliffe Fort. And it would be nice if we could link to something on the north Kent / south Thames forts generally (eg New Tavern Fort in neighbouring Gravesend).

Reply on Pratj's page - like he says, my user page is, ahem, cluttered! Cheers v much, JackyR | Talk 11:30, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, Pratj and I definitely need your advice! Could you look in at User talk:Pratj and make suggestions about how we organise the articles on fortifications in Medway? Very many thanks, JackyR | Talk 19:08, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

could you help us please, i need some advice from you. thx Pratj 18:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Birds on stamps

The article for deletion has been nearly completely rewritten; I invite you to review it and weigh in again. Captainktainer * Talk 07:37, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Golden Nugget Pancake House

Please see my comments on the talk page associated with the article as well as the afd page. TheQuandry 15:33, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Camp Pathfinder

This article just went through AFD, and the result was Keep. Prodding it is inappropiate, so I've removed the tag. exolon 04:53, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What's wrong with interaction information?

Why did you flag "interaction information" as "original research"? I cited a large collection of sources! Dfass 05:33, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HELLO !!!

Hi. Can you please let me know why you are trying to delete my contributions on Total Correlation and Interaction information. Let's communicate, please!

[edit] Once more: Interaction information & Total Correlation

From the talk page:

Response: Dear Nuttah68, a Ph.D. thesis typically contains a long literature review. The contents of these two articles are adapted from the lit review section of my thesis. The relevant sources are all given on the article pages. Why are we having this discussion? What part exactly do you feel is original research? Let me know, and I will try to address it. Otherwise, please un-flag these articles. Thanks much.

[edit] Fitlads

Is there any reason as to why you have labelled the entry for fitlads as being non notable? The site has 135,000 members - over 1/8 of a million! It's arguably more famous that a site such as outintheuk Triangle e 14:01, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion notices

Hello. If there's anyone on this site who tags and bags truly non-notable articles, it's me. However, your having twice tagged the Adamson band article as a speedy deletion is puzzling to say the least. Please don't do it again. - Lucky 6.9 17:08, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

You could take it to AfD, but it might be viewed as a bad-faith nomination. The group has been in continuous operation since the 1880s, they were founded by a notable individual and the article is within the scope of the WikiProjects listed on the talk page. The "NN band" was created because of the dozens of "garage band" articles that were clogging up AfD and are now speedy deletion candidates. If this is a hoax article, then by all means either AfD it or tag it as a speedy. I haven't Googled it, so who knows? - Lucky 6.9 17:25, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Just did. 215,000 unique hits. Looks like a keeper.  :) - Lucky 6.9 17:27, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

OK. I'll defer to your knowledge of the culture. - Lucky 6.9 21:59, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] M27 motorway

M27 motorway has a junction 13 with the A27; Northern Road/Northern Parade/Western Road/London Road/Copnor Road. You can use Collins, AA, RAC or Google maps for reference. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 23:53, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Marriage Law Project speedy delete?

I am not sure why you nominated this article for speedy delete. Please see recent additions and, if you consider them to be sufficient, withdraw your speedy delete nomination. If not, message me and I can provide more material. MPS

Here are some more links. You call it a "pressure group." Not sure what that means. I consider it an advocacy group, which is fairly common in Washington DCC
Washington Times
National Review
Concerned Women for America
Denver Rocky Mountain News
Dakota Voice
brigham university law review
Maryland University law review
I am going to post these on the talk page as well. MPS 19:10, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
See latest on the article talk page. I think high visibility (Washington Times) articles that state the name of the director, the location of the project (as a Catholic Law School), and some substance of the (anti-same sex marriage) marriage advocacy statement pretty much constitute an independent description of a Catholic Marriage Law Advocacy group. What more do you want as a descriptio nfrom independent sources? Founding date? Founder? Not trying to sound angry here but I admit it is a bit frustrating since obviously we keep disagreeing. Peace, MPS 19:28, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] prodding articles in Category:Copy to Wikibooks

Hi... if you could, please leave them be until wikibooks administrators can have a look. Some are worth importing, the others are prodded as we look through them (a lot of them would just get speedied on wikibooks anyway, so not worth importing). --SB_Johnny|talk|books 02:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gosport Ferry Company Ltd

If you check the official website it clearly states that ii is called the above. Unisouth 07:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summary

Hi, when tagging articles with prod or speedy_delete, please state so clearly in the edit summary. This will help other editors tremendously. Thanks. --Vsion 04:29, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tiffen speedy delete

I've removed your db from the page, because the article is about a well-recognized company and was requested by WikiProject Filmmaking. It may be a very short stub, but it is not unencyclopedic, nor is it advertising. The article needs expansion, yes, but deletion serves no purpose. Thank you, Girolamo Savonarola 18:30, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notify author of speedy

When nominating an article for speedy deletion, it is always best to notify the creator of its nomination. Placing a notice such as {{subst:nn-warn|Article Name}} on the author's talk page will let them know your intentions and allow them time to assert the article's notability. Thanks, -- AuburnPilottalk 19:19, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AfD/Greene Building, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Done. My apologies for the error. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 18:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Freckleton F.C.

I removed the {{db-bio}} ({{db-group}} surely ?) tag from Freckleton F.C.. If you believe it should be deleted, add a {{prod}} tag or take it to AfD. Cheers, Angus McLellan (Talk) 15:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy Tagging of RefWorks

I have reverted your tagging. I appreciate that WP attracts plenty of deletable articles every day, but I would advise you to be careful in what you tag. From a quick browse of your talk page it seems there are numerous pages being tagged mistakenly. Please check thoroughly that what you are tagging is speedy'able. Even when it is please use edit summaries mentioning the speedy deletion tag when adding it, and also notify the article creation author. If you don't want to follow these steps then you shouldn't be tagging articles with speedy notices. In the case of RefWorks it is a well known reference manager used widely within academia, is integrated into google scholar and as a single word garners 2.5 million google hits. In short it can in no way be defined as being a speedy candidate - at most it could be viewed as an AfD. Please try to be more careful, as constant mistaken speedy notice placement in the end generates as much work as it saves. Thanks, SFC9394 15:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

"As it stands it offers no notability or verification" - I have just offered 2.5 million forms of notability and verification - a simple google search that should be done on any web related article before speedy tagging to ensure mistakes are kept to a minimum. "if you believe two or three mistagged CSD per year are excessive" Nope - I believe the 5 mentioned on this talk page in the last month are excessive - most especially because you are not making other editors aware of the speedy notices by edit summaries and creation author notices. SFC9394 16:22, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
"I'm not sure how long you have been editing", I have been editing here about double the amount of time you have - not that that makes any difference to anything. Other editors have asked you to include edit summary notices - yet you are avoiding doing so.
It is an incredibly simple thing to type "SD" in the edit summary along with the criterion you are proposing for SD. To not do this simply is causing problems for other editors - not the point of this project. Please check the notability of things you are SD'ing - you may counter that it is not your task to be asserting notability - but it is equally your task to ensure that you are not carelessly SD'ing articles which are then lost - that is devaluing this encyclopedia (and if they aren't lost due to admin judgement then all you have done is waste a bit of their time). Best wishes for your future editing, I will leave you to continue operating as you wish, but it may be worth noting that when all the comments on your talk page are all singing the same hymn then it might be worth taking heed rather than ignoring them. SFC9394 17:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Indeed - and if verifiability were in doubt then the correct procedure would be to tag it with {{cleanup-verify}} or {{unsourced}} instead of tagging as SD for every single article that doesn't have a 3rd party source - the very policy you cite states that. SFC9394 17:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

If you had actually followed the link in the article then you would have found 16 independent 3rd party sources for verification. "However, it is clear you'd rather worry about what shoud (sic) be in an edit summary than actually improve articles." that is bordering on bad faith, but I will let it go. Good luck for your future editing, SFC9394 18:22, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I have found and linked to two reviews of this software. Additionally I have added a link to a blog as well as an online user guide. This is clearly a notable article. It would be far easier to identify your issue with the articles that you mark for "speedy deletion" if you would note this in the edit summary.

Also, as has been previously noted, please notify the author of your "speedy deletion" as this is a common courtesy.

Happy editing! Drew30319 22:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lauro Nova

You tagged Lauro Nova with {{db-bio}}. Did you read the article ? I've redirected it to Alhaurín el Grande. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, redirecting takes less effort. Anyway, {{db-bio}} is for people. Substub geographical articles could be tagged with {{db-empty}} if they are nothing but the name and {{db-nocontext}} if they don't contain enough info to make sense. Please reread WP:CSD. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:16, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Oak Grove Fire Department

You tagged Oak Grove Fire Department for deletion. Oak Grove Fire Department is part of WikiProject Fire Service, which is building a comprehensive and detailed guide to the fire service around the world. As it is part of a global WikiProject this article should not be deleted. Recommend to keep article.

Additionally, it is considered common courtesy to inform the author of an article when their article has been marked for deletion. This was not done by the requestor but I have now informed the author.

Drew30319 18:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Joseph W. Frazer

You tagged Joseph W. Frazer for deletion. I took the time to do a quick search and found a wealth of information about this individual. He is clearly noteworthy and I'm glad that I was able to easily verify this.

Additionally, it is considered common courtesy to inform the author of an article when their article has been marked for deletion. I see that many others have informed you of this common courtesy but you continue to mark articles for speedy deletion without this courtesy. Please refrain from doing so in the future.

Happy editing!

Drew30319 22:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Taco Bell items

I oppose the deletion for the List of Taco Bell items article and have removed the tag. Please see the article's talk page for my explanation. -- takethemud 01:21, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Detroit Athletic Club

I removed your speedy deletion tag from this article. It is notable, even outside of Detroit.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 21:28, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alexandra Nadejda Chrobok

I removed your speedy deletion tag from this article. A princess is considered notable. KillerChihuahua?!? 23:45, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you misread this article but the subject does not claim to be a princess (nor any other rank of nobility) and beyond this there is no claim to notability. I'll give it a couple of days to be expanded before putting bact through the deletion process. Nuttah68 13:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Either misread, or, more likely, mistyped when I posted here. Go ahead and Afd it now, if you wish. Its just not a clear cut case for Speedy. KillerChihuahua?!? 15:57, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Life of Uzodinma Eke-Okoro

You tagged The Life of Uzodinma Eke-Okoro for deletion. I would have userfied it instead. --Eastmain 18:53, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The deletion process

When you see an article that you suspect should be deleted, please consider applying a tag such as {{notability}} and raising the subject at the appropriate WikiProject and on the creator's talk page rather than tagging the article for speedy deletion. Often a weak article can be turned into a better one by following this route. In the same way, if I see an article about (for example) a mathematics professor which another editor thinks should be deleted, I will ask a Wikipedia editor who is a math professor himself for advice on whether to keep the article or not. --Eastmain 22:33, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Slipped disc

The article has not been blanked. It was last edited on August 30, 2006, and should have been deleted at that time. User:Rebroad has mistakenly attempted to reactivate the dead article, so any accusations of vandalism by that user are misplaced. -- Fyslee 13:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Answered on my talk page. -- Fyslee 13:17, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Nuttah68. I totally agree with you. That a redirect should only be appropriate if slipped disk is not used to describe other things as in your latest edit to the afd. From looking at the history for slipped disk it looks as though there are other conditions that it has been used to describe. I do also concur that the medical professional definition should get mentioned first in the article since it is a medical phenomenon. --Rebroad 16:08, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Editing 'Titchfield Carnival'

Please do not take out bits that the owner (me) of the web page put in. If you don't like it and you edit the page that doesn't need editing, you will be blocked from editing this page. Thank you. Choppie3000 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Choppie3000 (talk • contribs) 22:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Stop now please.

Please stop, use the Sandbox if you want to mess around.[citation needed] Choppie3000 22:15, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I do not understand!

Hello. I am very sorry but I don't understand what you are saying, I created the page so I get to edit things on there without anyone changing it, can't I? Choppie3000 22:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Crossrail Lines 2 and 3

Excellent point (that the information is already on the Crossrail page). Redirect seems like the answer! Nfitz 23:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This..

Why did you revert my speedy? Personally I think this redirect is not needed anymore, just have a look into whatlinkshere to see that no pages from main space links there. And people won't want to search for this article, 'cause there is Kristin Nelson one.. -- 83.27.132.154 11:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

It's a valid search term. Internal links should never got to redirects. Redirects are there to guide users to articles when there is more than one possible search term. Nuttah68 12:23, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Autism Sunday

Why did you remove my speedy deletion tag there, especially without any explanation? There is no assertion of notability in the article... If you do not answer shortly, I will nominate the article for deletion and it will have to go through AfD. J Milburn 20:39, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, logical explanation. They are claims, certainly, but they are unsourced, and a bit vague. Do you think it would be worth taking it to AfD? J Milburn 20:49, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Oh, well done, I will do. I couldn't find anything on google, that's why I tagged it in the first place. Happy editing. J Milburn 21:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/North Side High School (Fort Worth, Texas)

Thanks for your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/North Side High School (Fort Worth, Texas). I wanted to let you know that I found some references and added them to the article. --Eastmain 01:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kain (band)

The prod had expired 2 days ago, and db-music did indeed apply to the content. Orderinchaos78 17:39, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I would ask that you please assume good faith - it's more than fair to disagree with an action I've taken, and now that I've heard your argument I'm happy to concede on it. But accusing long-term contributors of vandalism does not further the aims of the project. Orderinchaos78 17:52, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Just saw your last edit - thanks. Orderinchaos78 17:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Schwagstock

Hi, following your comments in the AfD, I've stubified the article and found 2 sources. Would you reconsider? Thanks, Addhoc 16:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy tag

Hello! I reverted the speedy delete request you added in this edit. The article isn't an autobiography, so the dbi-bio tag isn't appropriate. If you think it should be deleted, consider {{prod}} or WP:AFD or read WP:CSD carefully to find another speedy that's better suited. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 15:51, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD for Back Dorm Boys

You said "Delete as failing WP:BIO unless some reliable sources can be provided". I think the list of sources that have been provided, in English and Chinese, help the article creep slightly towards the notability guideline. Of course, the vote is in your hands, after all. -Pandacomics 17:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AFDs

I see you are nominating a lot of articles for speedy deletion. Firstly I think it would be polite if you would notify the users who created the articles on their talk pages. Secondly, I think you are abusing the speedy deletion process by nominating articles that are not clear targets for speedy deletion. It is far too easy to get perfectly good articles removed by speedy deletion, and articles nominated in this way should be obvious immediate deletions. I do not see that Simpleton (Oklahoma band) is an obvious speedy deletion, although an AFD discussion would be appropriate. Similarly for some of the other nominiations such as Hargreaves Lansdown. Month-old articles can be deleted within a few hours without the users having any chance to respond. Nssdfdsfds 14:23, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yngve Raustein

I've removed the speedy deletion tag from the above article. While the subject might not be notable, the article does assert notability in a reasonable way. You may wish to list it at WP:AFD instead, to get a broader consensus on the article. Thanks for your time and your hard work reporting these articles - even though I'm not deleting this particular one, your efforts are very much appreciated. Kafziel Talk 19:18, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More PRODs removed

I have removed the PROD tags on Oxford University Conservative Association, University College London Conservative Society, and King's College London Conservative Society. PROD is for non-controversial nominations only. Bastin 03:48, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] George Vithoulkas copyvio

It was a copyvio of [2], with the first word or so of each sentence replaced by synonyms. Changed just enough to not come up on a search of a full sentence, but obvious if you read them soon enough after each other to grow suspicious, and then look and compare. Adam Cuerden talk 17:26, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../n/u/t/User_talk%7ENuttah68_269b.html"