User talk:Metropolitan90

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Message from EuroCarGT[edit]

Greetings Metropolitan90! I've seen your !vote on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Ishantpahwa8, a page a nominated for deletion. I've seen you added per WP:BITE..., I just wanted to let you know that I wasn't trying to 'bite' the user as I have no clue which user is new or not as I don't observe and monitor every user's join date. I just monitor recent changes and see pages that sets flags. Regarding the harmless userpage... part, I relate to WP:UPYES. Just to note I always try to be positive to all users and thanks for your contributions. Best and kind regards, ///EuroCarGT 04:40, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Before nominating a userpage for deletion, I would suggest looking at the page history [1] which indicates that this page was created less than 90 minutes before it was nominated for deletion. You may also want to check the user's contributions (Special:Contributions/Ishantpahwa8) which indicates that this page's creation on 4 August 2014 was the user's only contribution (they hadn't edited anything else before creating this userpage). And, if there was still doubt, the user's log (Special:Log/Ishantpahwa8) indicates that the account was also created on 4 August 2014. There are some other userpages which are currently being considered for deletion, which are also harmless, but I haven't stepped in to recommend "keep" for them because those users have not edited Wikipedia in months or years. But for a new user, I did feel the need to step in. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:19, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Alrighty! I'll deeply observe into the user's contributions. Best, ///EuroCarGT 04:05, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion decline[edit]

Hello. Could I ask why you declined my speedy nom of User:Andy Fiore? I thought it was pretty clearly in WP:FAKEARTICLE and WP:UP#PROMO territory. I've nominated lots of similar user pages in the past and they were deleted. --Drm310 (talk) 16:35, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

  • WP:UPYES allows a "small and proportionate amount of suitable unrelated material" on a userpage, and I didn't see the page as being promotional enough to be problematic. I interpret WP:BITE to discourage the idea of deleting a new user's userpage as the first thing that happens to them on Wikipedia. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:23, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
I guess I interpret that part of the userpage policy differently. I still think that the content is unduly self-serving and contrary to WP:NOTWEBHOST, including some subsequent IP editor changes. I've inserted a {{userpage}} template with noindex=yes, so at least it isn't indexed by search engines. --Drm310 (talk) 17:18, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Happy Town (musical)[edit]

Sorry for my incorrect speedy nomination of this article. For future reference, does the mere existence of a performance make it notable? Meters (talk) 18:26, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

  • I would classify a musical like this to be a literary work like a play, rather than an event, and thus not eligible for WP:CSD#A7. I am not saying the musical is guaranteed to be notable -- I couldn't find any relevant notability criterion or common outcome -- but being a Broadway production is at least an assertion of notability that should enable the article to get past speedy deletion. If deletion is appropriate, that should be done via WP:AFD instead of speedy deletion so that its notability can be considered. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 18:34, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for clearing that up. And yes, I should have asked "Is mere existence of a performance a claim of notability?" Meters (talk) 18:47, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
If the performance was on Broadway, as this one was, then I personally would consider that to be a claim of notability. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 19:06, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Npk Twice, third, fourth, fifth ... etc[edit]

Hi Metropolitan90,
By my count Npk Twice has now been deleted, under just that particular pagename, about seven times. Thanks for zapping it! --220 of Borg 05:30, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

... and it has been re-created again NPK Twice, could you please delete and create protect. Thanks, JMHamo (talk) 16:28, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[edit]

It was a content dispute/edit warring between auto-confirmed editors. I wasn't about to block all the editors. If you feel that it needs removing then make a request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for reduction in protection level. Make sure you mention and link to this so you can show that I've seen and responded to your comment and don't mind if another admin removes the protection. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 02:42, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Don Lichterman[edit]

Might want to SALT Don Lichterman and Don lichterman. Wgolf (talk) 17:26, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

  • I don't think that's necessary at this time. The recent creation of Don Lichterman was the first time the article had been re-created in almost two years. Besides, maybe someday the subject might be ascertained as notable. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:30, 5 October 2014 (UTC)


Please explain Why do you think we should keep this vandal's talk page? If you respond here, please use {{Ping}}. —Justin (koavf)TCM 03:10, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

  • @Koavf: You had tagged the talk page only with {{delete}} which generates the message, "This talk page may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, but no reason has been given for why it qualifies." If there is a reason the talk page should be speedily deleted, please feel free to renominate it, but WP:CSD doesn't say anything I can find that says that a vandal's user page ought to be speedily deleted. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:15, 20 October 2014 (UTC)