User talk:NawlinWiki

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

This talk page is archived every month (if I remember). The older pages are indexed at User talk:NawlinWiki/Archives.

Please sign your comments by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ).

Wondering why your pages were speedily deleted? Check this list first.

Do you want to move a page that I've move-protected? Discuss the move first on the article's talk page. If there's a consensus for the move, let me know and I'll unlock the page.

Please add all comments at the bottom of the page (or I may not be able to find them).

Lavora R. Barnes[edit]

Why did you delete the page for Lavora R. Barnes when proper sources were cited giving significance of the individual? Lavora R. Barnes is currently the Deputy Clerk/Register of Deeds for Oakland County, Michigan, serving under Oakland County Clerk/Register of Deeds Lisa Brown. She has also held significant positions with the Obama for America Campaign and the Clinton Administration, and served as Director of Communications for the Michigan House Democrats. Cilliandowney (talk) 16:39, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

  • None of those positions constitute a notable office per our guidelines, see WP:POLITICIAN. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:24, 5 March 2015 (UTC)


Hello NawlinWiki. Serious question: have you ever been a checkuser? (talk) 21:59, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

  • No. And I see from your other contributions you are making a big fuss about "confirmed" v. "suspected" tagging. In many cases, it is obvious from the contributions that a sockpuppet is a sockpuppet of a given sockmaster. But if you want me to start using "suspected" from now on, sure. NawlinWiki (talk) 22:48, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
No, I wasn't making "a big fuss". All I was doing was asking two straightforward questions. Certain SPI clerks seem to have made a big fuss over that, rather than simply answer them. I deduce from your answer that you have (counter to policy) tagged "confirmed" when it should have been "suspected". As you accept your mistake, I think you should revisit all your errors and apply the correct tags retrospectively. (talk) 18:30, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
I disagree. The tags are purely for internal record-keeping, and a blocked sockpuppet is not "suspected". HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:58, 6 March 2015 (UTC)


Hey Nal, can you give me the source for the deleted pages "Japanese Ritual Day" and "Video games with something about chicken soup"? Many thanks in advance? (And Kotohimelove was misunderstood, she was just trying to have some fun, maybe if she got a second chance, she'd be more careful and REVERT her edits after she did them?) (talk) 12:43, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

  • No, I'm not going to help you repost hoax articles. NawlinWiki (talk) 18:00, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

ongoing edit war[edit]

Islam page has been having an edit war. I am involved. I saw that you are an admin and you commented on a discussion regarding slavery. Can you please take a look at the page and help with discussions and consensus. Maybe protect the page with high level protection? FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 10:13, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

A problematic user[edit]

There's a user called "Bradford ISIS" who appears to be promoting ISIS. They look like they might get threatening. Maybe. Maybe not. —George8211 / T 19:49, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, they've already been blocked for 48 hrs. —George8211 / T 19:50, 8 March 2015 (UTC)


Please do it for diff 650,677,797 on my userpage. It was a vandal who defaced my talk page. Antiv31discuss 09:37, 10 March 2015 (UTC) Recovery[edit]

Hi Nawlin, I am copying and pasting a previous talk.
Deletion of[edit] Dear Nawlin, has been deleted due to violation of A7 article. However, after it was marked for Speedy Deletion, I added my comments that explained its Credibility and Significance. I did read the article A7 carefully, and according to those instructions fulfilled those two criteria (as explained on my previous talk on speedy-deletion). Would you please advise what am I missing?

Thank you!

Optimus212 (talk) 23:02, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

What we mean by notability is not that you've persuaded us of your belief that the subject is important. We have objective guidelines for notability of websites, see WP:WEB. Also, we require that the subject have been reported on by reliable independent sources, see WP:V. NawlinWiki (talk) 01:01, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Now, we have a reputable source from Microsoft: may we recover this page under this reference:

Optimus212 (talk) 17:05, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

  • That's Microsoft promotional material, not an independent, neutral source. See WP:RS. NawlinWiki (talk) 19:14, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

NawlinWiki is right. That is for promotion, so it's not WP:NPOV. Antiv31 discuss 06:39, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you for a prompt response. It is not a promotional material, rather it is a case study. We are a highly regard search engine in the Albanian speaking community world wide. Microsoft Case Studies are also used in academia and are regarded as a proper reference in reputable journals. Are these promotional materials as well? Optimus212 (talk) 21:10, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

  • The Webrazzi article appears to be a valid source. The Inventures site is down, so I can't comment on that at the moment. NawlinWiki (talk) 22:08, 11 March 2015 (UTC) (talk) 12:08, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

    • Still (or back) down as of now. NawlinWiki (talk) 20:51, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Hi Nawlin - can we recover the article at this time? Optimus212 (talk) 13:47, 19 March 2015 (UTC)


Hi NawlinWiki, I noticed you recently semi-protected Mohonk Mountain House for six months. Could you also do the same for Mohonk Preserve? The same set of IPs like to disrupt and/or vandalize that article as well, so the two articles apparently need to be semi-protected in tandem. Anyway, if so, thanks. Softlavender (talk) 23:14, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Stagger (FILM)[edit]

Does Stagger (FILM) look like something you've seen before? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:43, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

The Angelic Process[edit]

Greetings. You deleted this band's page 3 years ago. I don't know how well the previous 'attemptee' put things but I want your go-ahead to work on it in my sandbox. So basically,The Angelic Process was a duo that played a mixture of atmospheric,shoegaze and drone music. Their discography consisted of seven released works and they were active from 1999 until 2008 when the lead singer-songwriter passed away.Their work is considered pioneering to the subgenre and their swansong album Weighing Souls With Sand (released under Profound Lore Records ) was especially well received with widespread very positive scores online including from professional reviewers such as Sputnikmusic ( link ), Blabbermouth (link ),PopMatters (link),AllMusic (link),MetalStorm (link) and from collaborative user-based websites such as Rate Your Music (link). Similar musical groups already on Wikipedia that may have been influential/influenced include Nadja,Jesu,Have a Nice Life,Locrian,Sunn O))) and Boris. This is their (link) with over thirty thousand listeners. This is their Discogs (link).

So I hope this convinced you of their 'relevancy' which has been built up even after their termination much higher than it was three years ago.I think a Wikipedia page is well overdue. --MightySaiyan (talk) 20:52, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

  • No objection from me. Thanks! NawlinWiki (talk) 15:38, 25 March 2015 (UTC)