User talk:Marcerickson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Proposed deletion

I wanted to inform you that I proposed Stan Freberg Presents The United States of America Volume One The Early Years for deletion. Click on the blue link to see why. You have an opportunity to oppose the deletion if you think it's a mistake. YechielMan 21:51, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I have restored the deleted page. WP:PROD is the process by which uncontroversial deletions are done. The PROD notice on the article is considered notice of the deletion. When the notice has been left for five days, the page can then be deleted at any time by an admin. But one key for PROD deletions is the "uncontroversial" part. Any opposition to the deletion, before or after, is enough to overturn the deletion. You have complained, the deletion is thus no longer uncontroversial, and thus it has been restored. If the original nominator wishes to still delete this, they will need to either send it through WP:CSD or WP:AFD. These are the other two deletion processes on the project, and are more complicated than PROD.

My part in this was simply to notice that it had been on PROD for more than five days, and to thus complete the deletion. The reasoning for the deletion was that the information had been merged to another page, so there was no remaining purpose for the separate page. If you want more explanation than that, you will need to ask the person who originally listed the page for PROD deletion, User:YechielMan.

Defining a few of the things you were questioning about on the email:

Prod reason? - See WP:PROD the reason for the proposed deletion.

Tagging? - Placing a "tag" on the article, showing that it is subject to deletion.

Db-g6 (speedy)? - WP:CSD Speedy deletion. One of the other deletion processes. Fast, but very limited in what it can be used on.

Stop sign? - A chance to protest the PROD deletion.

In his PROD reason, User:YechielMan stated that the page fit the requirements for Speedy Deletion, specifically reason G6, housekeeping. He merged the information to another page, so it was a housekeeping chore to remove the now redundant page. But instead, he gave you the courtesy of placing the page up for PROD instead, giving an extra five day chance for you to respond and possibly oppose the deletion. You did not, so it was deleted on schedule. He even gave you a notice as listed above. So IMHO he did a good job of trying to give you a chance to respond if you wanted. - TexasAndroid 19:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

As TexasAndroid said, my rationale for deleting the article was that I had merged much of the content with Stan Freberg, who wrote the record, since that article is longer and better developed. Wikipedia's policy on handling this kind of situation is somewhat undefined. Whether to merge an individual album or to keep it as a separate article is often a judgment call. I thought merging it was better, but since you prefer to keep it separate, I respect your opinion as the article's creator. YechielMan 17:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Email vs on-wiki response

You asked if I was alergic to Email. No. I am, however, a fairly private person. I prefer not to share my email address around. I can list my email for the "Email this user" privately, and there is no way for others to see the address. I can be reached without my address being seen. But there is really no way for me to respond via email without giving out the address. I prefer not to do this for a variety of reasons. Especially since, as an admin, I am going to by nature be encountering situations where people disagree with my actions. Sometimes quite... strongly. I really just do not want my personal, private email address to be getting out publically, so I simply do not respond by email. - TexasAndroid 21:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)