User talk:Fadesga/Archives/2013/October

Removing speedy tags

just so you know: erroneous though these speedy nomination are (because there are each a great extension of the material there, great enough to amount to a valid split of the article & the speedy criterion A10 does not apply to valid splits,) I must tell you as reviewing administrator, that you should not have removed the speedy tag yourself, but instead explain our objections on the article talk page as instructed in the above notices.

Just as a matter of judgment and strategy, I suggest you be very cautious in making split articles of this sort. Unless the two nations are closely connected geographically or culturally or economically, or at least one of them is a major power, a great many decisions on articles of this sort have been to merge them. (I'm giving you as best I can the consensus view--I personally have usually supported such articles, but often the decision has gone against me. I suggest you should go very slowly in this, until you see what the community thinks of them. Otherwise, you stand a very considerable chance of wasting your energies and seeing the work deleted. For the ones you have already made, they are quite likely to be nominated soon for AfD by someone, and I suggest you immediately see if you can find and add additional good references and material.

If you want to work on this general line, I would suggest you first work on making sections in the general Foreign relations of Uruguay article for those countries that do not have them. Delay making them into separate articles for a few months, to see if the ones you already made get nominated for deletion at AfD , and what the result will be.

Previoud unsigned comment by User:DGG 20:19, 14 September 2013‎

May I suggest that any series of articles of this kind could be brought up in WP:Uruguay. This has two benefits, first the project doesn't look abandoned and second, even if it the two of us right now, it still amounts to "consensus", plus it is open for others to contest/support. Also anyone intending to nominate many articles of a series should notify us there first. And BTW, I almost missed this one, as I am not following your userpage, and I am interested to participate in such developments. Thanks. Hoverfish Talk 02:07, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

About some sights in Canelones

Hi Fadesga, I wish to ask you about some sights you added in Canelones. About Parque Roosevelt, do you think it should have its own article? We have the article Parque Carrasco, where it belongs, and which is almost empty and in need of content. Do you agree to cover this as part of that article? The same about El Águila (Atlántida) (which should be El Águila (Villa Argentina) correctly), we could treat this topic in Villa Argentina and point the link to there instead. My concern is to expand the existing articles, and maybe when we have enough information to make them class C, we could split them. What do you say? Hoverfish Talk 02:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for letting me know. I will support the separate articles then. Hoverfish Talk 02:26, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Category:Emmet Swimming

Category:Emmet Swimming, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:28, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

A page you started (Law on the Expiration of the Punitive Claims of the State) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Law on the Expiration of the Punitive Claims of the State, Fadesga!

Wikipedia editor Sulfurboy just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Please mark unreviewed after major edit is done.

To reply, leave a comment on Sulfurboy's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.