User talk:Dbachmann

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User:Dbachmann)
Jump to: navigation, search


Proposed deletion of Narsilion (band)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Narsilion (band) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not meet any criteria of WP:BAND. All sources in the article are dead. Band's website is dead. There is no significant coverage of the band to be found (note: "Narsilion" is a Tolkien reference). The band has not released on major labels, is not an originator of its style, has not charted on major charts, has not been in competitions, and meets no criterion whatsoever.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MSJapan (talk) 23:58, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Origin of religion[edit]

Would you please revisit Origin of religion? You can read discussion at User talk:Editor2020#Origin of religion, regarding what happened recently. I don't get what is so new in this article that cannot be found in Theories about religions, Paleolithic religion and few others. I think it should be better kept as a redirect, what do you think Dbachmann? 2001:41D0:6B:3D00:0:0:0:21C (talk) 02:47, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

You had looked into this? 2001:41D0:6B:3D00:0:0:0:21C (talk) 17:12, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Tunisian Arabic[edit]

Dear User,

Tunisian Arabic is nominated for GA Status. Please review this work and adjust it if he involves several deficiencies.

Yours Sincerely,

--Csisc (talk) 12:03, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Hattat Aziz Efendi[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Hattat Aziz Efendi has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Redsky89 (talk) 06:59, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Hattat Aziz Efendi for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hattat Aziz Efendi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hattat Aziz Efendi until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Redsky89 (talk) 14:44, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

See Muhammad_of_Ghor[edit]

There are many articles in Wikipedia using a mediaeval ballad Prithviraj Raso as a reliable source of history, while the highest authorities on mediaeval Indian history are ignored. I added some sourced material in the article Muhammad_of_Ghor which was reverted by Kansas_Bear without discussion. I have made it a policy not to interfere in Wikipedia if someone reverts my contributions, because I have neither any interest in nor time for fightings. Since you are interested in India-related articles, you can see the changes at :- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Muhammad_of_Ghor&type=revision&diff=674742674&oldid=674729398 Kansas_Bear's talk page contains the web link of the textbook which I had cited. It is the basic textbook in India. Unfortunately, Kansas_Bear thinks the information I provided is related only to a ballad Prithviraj Raso and is irrelevant to the real history of either Muhammad_of_Ghor or Prithviraj Chauhan and other related articles, ignoring the fact that this information is related to the incident from which slavery of India begins:- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kansas_Bear#Wrong_Editing_of_Muhammad_of_Ghor I have provided it merely as an information to you, and I will not pursue this or any other issue.VJha (talk) 09:50, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

No, I said the information, was poorly placed, poorly written, and improperly sourced. Dbachmann is more than welcome to read the "discussion" on my talk page. --Kansas Bear (talk) 15:34, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Both of you are active editors (I have little time for Wikipedia NOW), and if I put it wrongly, either ignore the information or use it properly, I am not going to edit these articles because I keep away from reverted articles. I have done my duty by sending the correct information together with authoritative source, either use it or keep the correct information out of Wikipedia. Wrong info about Prithviraj is used by right-wing Hindu extremists in India, while Satish Chandra is a leftist ; I keep away from both.VJha (talk) 16:01, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Removal of content[edit]

If I reverted your edits in error. Apologies. However I did see that the section on chlorophobia - fear of clowns - had been removed and I assumed that you had done that. This section had referenced content and there was no explanation for its removal Robynthehode (talk) 17:04, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

It's not a problem. But "chlorophobia" would be fear of greens, I suppose. I did not remove the rambling about "sacred clowns in ancient Egypt", I moved it into a section on cultural comparison. --dab (𒁳) 10:28, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Ulfbert-Schwerter[edit]

Anmerkungen (durchaus berechtigt) besser in dem zusammenfassenden Lemma als in dem Gräberfeldartikel Sommerx2015 (talk) 15:06, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

völlig richtig, ich fühlte mich etwas sarkastisch, aber es ist sicher richtig, wenn die Fussnote als ganzes entfernt wird. --dab (𒁳) 10:26, 1 September 2015 (UTC)