Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 November 29

29 November 2010

Marshal_Walker

Marshal_Walker (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (restore)

abuse of military outlaw hardware in a public facility (WINDUH) MarsHALwaLker (talk) 23:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC) contribs) MIL.HUNGRY over the Gogo Dodo is a false credential mafia affiliate not established as MIL authority - fake acting OAAA —Preceding unsigned comment added by MarsHALwaLker (talk • contribs) 23:19, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

• Comment by deleting admin: Article was a mostly incomprehensible mish-mash of some conspiracy theory, much like this DRV request. While the article was delete under CSD G1, it could have been deleted under CSD G3 as a blatant hoax or CSD A7 as a non-notable biography. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 23:24, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
• leave deleted - unless the author comes up with a real biography of a real person in user space to transfer to mainspace first. please salt if recreated. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 23:36, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

the article was a legitimate description of the military facade behind wikipedia that is using brain manipulation to distort articles - CSD G1 is a mafia established means of taking down any references to playboy or vegas inter alia , it has no military credibility and there is no military behind WIKIPEDIA the scanning engine which was used to determine terrorist activity is a non-employ of any legitimate military who using false credentials and stolen hardware developed and enterprise for lobbying for more porn and greed - you have a lot of explaining to do for working for that mutt let alone for the CSD G3 which means criminal intent to terrorize a terrorist network (mafia) and CSD A7 which is an actual nuclear detonation code to attempt to detonate any thermal device within the area of the person who submitted the article —Preceding unsigned comment added by MarsHALwaLker (talk • contribs) 23:37, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

• leave deleted - unless the author comes up with a real biography of a real person in user space to transfer to mainspace first. please salt if recreated. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 23:36, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

rocks and dirt is the mil supervisor faking NATO clearance, there is no nato there never was a legitimate body as such let alone an imposter , "salt if recreated" means turn body into land mine through aerial bacterial weaponry out of FBA nevada —Preceding unsigned comment added by MarsHALwaLker (talk • contribs) 23:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

thinking that you can backdoor the MIL-SUPREME network with some sort of logic that the FBI is not allowed to administer their own wikipedia page by "cert authority" is going to get you dead real, real, real quick -- ever walk outside at all ? ever ? --MarsHALwaLker (talk) 23:49, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

better call up NATO-ITALY and ask for a car --MarsHALwaLker (talk) 23:54, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

three feet away from the pi mainframe you used to control saigon to escalate a nuclear attack against the Network Nefin ? sitting in mil-command complex does not make you a mil man , 2 feet of steel bar wont save you either - and i can sit here where its warm and wait all day for your brain to be harvested and studied for research as to your multiple personality disorder , aside from your having eaten pig penis back in somolia

Anushka Wirasinha

Anushka Wirasinha (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

An author page was created for this author in 2008 by someone. It was included in wikipedia as it met notabiity criteria. There were some edits done but poorly done but article remained for 2 yrs till 2010. An unusual email was sent by an unknown source to wiki foundation via an email claiming some issues that were not quite correct but it led to deletion of the article even though there was interest in adding further material and comments by certain users that it had met notability criteria through verifiable sources that were relliable. Another editor created a new page for the author and I also worked on getting more material done. The article seemed to have met notability criteria in a number of ways. WP:ACADEMICS, WP:CREATIVE, WP:NOTTEMP and WP:RS Despite meeting technical criteria and these discussed, while the discussion was on going the article was deleted by an admin. Editors were in the process of collecting further archived works from foreign sources that shows further notability when the article was deleted. Translations were also being done and alot of this work that many editors incuding myself were doing came to an end. Attempts to contact the admins are of little luck and I was wondering if the article can be sent to the incubator so work can continue on it and we do not lose the work already done.I understand the difficulty in getting material in foreign countries but we have taken a lot of effort to contact persons in those countries to get the article done well. We just want to keep working on this for a few more days to include everything.

In my view notability is met with the following:

• Three IT books (Visually Learn PC, On Your Marks Net Set Go, Surviving in an e-world and Flash in a Flash: web development) published by well known traditional publisher Prentice Hall India are used as University textbooks and course material in several universities in India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Malaysia and Sri Lanka.
• Other books including "Study buddy" is used in Sri Lanka schools and endorsed by the Sri Lanka education board to be used in schools in the country.
• Books have been used as school textbooks, university textbooks and course material for over 10 years.
• Author has introduced a new concept of Computer art and animation to schools and verifiable by the schools and reliable mainstream newspapers.
• Author's books of IT when published by Prentice Hall India were the first IT books written by a Sri Lankan in Sri Lanka in English to be published by an international publisher.
• Her books were in the India Times bestseller list (need few days to get the archives content)
• Several mainstream newspapers and magazines have written articles about her and interviews are there in well known sources. (another editor scanned and had included these images but due to copyright it has been temporarily removed till copyright is obtained. Meanwhile it is temporarily on flikr page for that editor.)

Discussion was taking place on how better to improve this article and some admins were helping with useful comments and we were all trying to get a good article put together. It is really not about getting the article on wikipedia but rather I am determined to give any article the chance to give the best shot at showing editors why it should be included. This article has not been given that chance. There is much more material that is different and relevant to determining its notability.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Chamithra (talk • contribs)

Category:Major League Baseball pinch hitters

Category:Major League Baseball pinch hitters (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

This is fairly new to me but seems to be the recommended procedure. Deleted category as I felt that reflect consensus at CfD and this was disputed at WikiProject Baseball. Some discussion ensued on my talk page. Procedural listing in which I do not hold a strong opinion either way. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 19:17, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

• Endorse deletion as I agree with the argurments put up in the discussion and would add that categorizing by a single action in a game would be the equivalent of picking any other random action in a game and categorizing by it. You can't look up a pinch hitter on a team roster as the position does not exist. The fact that a few players only ever performed that action in their career does not make it a position. All that being said I have no problem with a relisting. But not an outright restore. -DJSasso (talk) 19:22, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
• Endorse. For the vast majority of players, the fact that they pinch hit is not a defining characteristic. I agree with the comparison I read elsewhere that this is comparable to a category for players who hit 4th in the batting order. --Kbdank71 20:03, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
• Endorse (orig nominator). I understand the idea that there are some players who only were ever pinch hitters in their careers and never played a defensive position or were in a starting line-up, but they are a miniscule minority compared to the total number of players who have been pinch hitters. I suppose we could re-list this due to limited participation, but I wouldn't anticipate that a different result would be likely. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 20:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
• Relist - The category is appropriate for players who never played a defensive position. While such players are few in proportion to the thousands of major league baseball players, there were a non-trivial number of players whose sole major league appearances were as pinch hitters. I am not sure that "pinch hitter" is not a defensive position or a position listed on a roster matters in the context of retaining or deleting the category. Rlendog (talk) 22:02, 29 November 2010 (UTC)