User talk:NawlinWiki/Archive 23

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

Wondering why your article was 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).

_________

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.252.10.168 (talk) 17:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello you delete my page "http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Baer/" because it wasn't usefull; however, I was not done editing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Buenotaco55 (talk • contribs) 14:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What just happened?

Professori Aarne Halmeen johtama automaatiotekniikan tutkimusryhmä on mukana tekniikan alan EXPO21XX-virtuaalimessuilla. Messuille on avattu uusi tutkimusta esittelevä halli automaation siipeen. Tutkimusryhmän virtuaaliständillä esitellään ryhmän kehittämiä robotteja. Ständiltä löytyy mm. videoesittely WorkPartner-robotista. Kutsu osallistumisesta tuli suoraan messujärjestäjiltä, jotka hoitivat myös ständin pystytyksen. Tutkimusständeistä ei aiheudu kuluja, vaan ne katetaan messujärjestäjien hankkimalla EU-rahoituksella. TKK:n lisäksi messuilla on mukana tutkimusryhmiä Englannista, Saksasta, Ruotsista, Yhdysvalloista ja Ranskasta.

I am wondering why you keep on deleting this particular platform, we have specifically designed for robotics departments world wide to showcase their research to potential students on one platform, all free of charge. If you take a look at this platform, you would notice that it has nothing to do with "blatant advertising" as you call it, but rather an information platform with contributions from some of the best brains in the field of robotics world wide. Now, tell me! If you accept the inclusion of the name KUKA, a top robotic production firm in the world, cannot it be termed as "blatant advertising?" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Squart (talk • contribs) 10:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Epygi

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Epygi, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? BJ^Talk 10:16, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re All My Goodness

Seeing as I have very recently indef blocked the (re)creator of the above article for... um... recreating the article after it being deleted twice, I should just like your confirmation that I should now unblock User:Leahpar and eat of some crow upon their talkpage. Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:27, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am even now picking my teeth with a quill with black feathers... LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy Bison

Hello, How come you deleted my article on the Web Series Jeremy Bison? From What I can tell it does not void the terms of use. It is informitive about this young man and gives good facts for wikipedia users looking for more information on Jeremy. I am not Jeremy himself, so therefor I am not advertising myself nor am I advertising him. I am plainly giving other facts about Jeremy and his web series.

Please contact me at jhberson@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drumsruledaworld (talk • contribs) 23:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zdzisław Kaczmarczyk

Is there any specific reason why a non-controversial article such as this one cannot have a prod tag placed on it? (>O_o)> Something X <(^_^<) 14:58, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

US Democrats Nominee

My Apologise, it will not happen again.

--Thomassampson (talk) 17:08, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Francis grave

Hi there. I was patrolling the new pages and this one popped up. While I was tagging it with the expansion template, I think it got deleted. Then by the time i completed the tagging, I seemed to have created the article with just the tag! If that now makes me the author of the page, as far as I'm concerned it can be speedily deleted! Ged UK (talk) 17:13, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up

Sorry to bother, but someone didn't quite take your warning seriously: [1]. Merci. Ecoleetage (talk) 17:39, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that was fast! Thanks! :) Ecoleetage (talk) 17:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clonakilty AFC

Howdy, I think the article Clonakilty AFC did assert notability (recent championship, linked from Clonakilty I believe, but I can't see deleted contributions). Also I think the article was nominated for speedy and declined. Can you check? JackSchmidt (talk) 18:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Glad my memory was correct. I've been stub sorting a wide range of pitiful articles and usually check if they warrant speedy deletes or prods. I figure lots of these will eventually be deleted or merged by wikiprojects, but I like to let the subject experts decide what to do with the articles if they are not just obvious trash. At least for new math articles, I've been surprised at how many "good looking" articles were trash and how many dictionary definitions were notable and easy to fix to start class, so I figure soccer stubs must be just as weird. JackSchmidt (talk) 19:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wilson

I have done so by now. The move should not be controversial. A man should not be deprived of his first name. Str1977 ^(talk) 21:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If that is so it's a shame. People have a right not to have their names mutilated by depriving them of a first name. Sure, Al Gore not filed under "Albert Gore Jr." but neither is he simply "Gore". Str1977 ^(talk) 21:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But Woodrow is not actual christian name but his mothers maiden name. The current president or his father are not filed under "Walker Bush". Str1977 ^(talk) 21:24, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'll see whether anyone disagrees. Str1977 ^(talk) 21:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You cited your opinion that the policy supports Woodrow Wilson instead of his actual name including the first name. I base myself on no other policy but hold a different opinion.

PS. Your disagreement (posted on the talk page) is now noted as opposed to before, when I had not seen your comment there and only had your edit summary which didn't bring a substantial opposition but only talked about a lack of consensus.

BTW, any further discussion should be on the talk page and not on user talk pages. Str1977 ^(talk) 21:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your userpage

Hi. Just a note: your userpage has been vandalised 24 times within the past 3 weeks (average - one every 21 hours). Would you like to semi-protect it, to lower the vandalism? Or, can it be reverted easily and quickly because many users are watching your userpage on their watchlist (myself included)? Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 21:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're my hero

After a night of chasing down this guy's socks, you made my night with this edit. You're my new Wiki hero. hehe. Cheers! Redfarmer (talk) 02:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

d'oh - you beat me to it

User_talk:68.217.248.180 was going to be my first non-test blockee. Quick question though, since one of his vandalisms was to my user page, should I have let another admin do it? Or is it only a COI when there's been a good-faith editing dispute? xenocidic (talk) 15:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, no problem at all. After that last bit of racism, he definitely needed blocked asap. Thanks for the advice, and the welcome! xenocidic (talk) 15:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Curious - that vandal added some random phone number on Gary King's page, I deleted the revision. I don't think oversight is necessary in this case, is it? xenocidic (talk) 17:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gyst article - deletion

Hi, you deleted an article I had heavily contributed to as well, (Gyst) and it was completely apposite for wikipedia - factual, unbiased, and informative about a small organisation (well i thought so at any rate) - why did you delete it? Do problems arise from having too many articles on wikipedia, or were you just being stingy? I've generally had good experiences with Wikipedia so I'm presuming its the former... willval123 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Willval123 (talk • contribs) 17:23, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ok, so an article must be centred on a significant item - is that just wikipedia's policy or is there a reason? this is just curiosity now, by the by, don't worry about replying if you're busy...

ok - apologies for wasting your time —Preceding unsigned comment added by Willval123 (talk • contribs) 17:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS - i wasnt talking about myself, just to clarify if you think i'm a complete goon... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Willval123 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]