User talk:DanTD/Archive. August 2011

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


Proposed deletion of Full House: Spring '96

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Full House: Spring '96 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non-notable comp

While all 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. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 05:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ZeroHour - Full House Spring 96 Sampler.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ZeroHour - Full House Spring 96 Sampler.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 04:17, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

I-95 article

Hi, I am a traffic engineer in South Florida. I am trying to piece together the history of US 1 in the very south end of Miami-Dade County. I saw in your I-95 article that you referenced a map...General Highway Map, Dade County, Florida, September 1972 reprinted 1980... Is there any way I can get a copy of that map? FDOT only has the "revised" map which is from the mid 1980's.

Thanks for any help you can give me.Jmdengr (talk) 17:50, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Meshanticut Interchange

Moved from User talk:SPUI#Proposed deletion of Meshanticut Interchange
  • Oppose and NOTE: The article doesn't say it's the first interchange in the state. It's say's it's one of the first. Be that as it may, I don't necessarily disagree with the lack of notability, although the Google Map of the interchange does show it as being quite unconventional. I say Merge it into Rhode Island Route 2. ----DanTD (talk) 03:59, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
    • Further Comment: UglyBridges.com claims to have the real origins of segments of the interchange. Here's one now. Isn't there an AfD page for this article where we can discuss this? ----DanTD (talk) 04:17, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Dan, SPUI hasn't been active since 2007, so commenting on his talk page was worthless. WP:Twinkle automatically notifies the creator of an article when it is tagged as PROD, which is a "proposed deletion". Removing the PROD tag(s) is sufficient to stop that proposal. As for AfD, there are three methods to handle deleting an article: CSD, which are the criteria for speedy deletion that if met means the article gets deleted without discussion; PROD which is just a proposal that something be deleted; AfD which opens up a whole discussion. I didn't have to send the article to AfD, in fact, PROD is a useful and lightweight first step. AfD is more like the sledgehammer than the fly swatter, and if something has never been tagged as a PROD, I don't use AfD. (AfD must be used if an article has had a PROD or AfD before and it doesn't qualify under CSD.) Imzadi 1979  20:16, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

  • I would've preferred not to discuss it on his page, but I didn't see much of an alternative. ----DanTD (talk) 23:39, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
    • There's the talk page for the article itself, which is always a better choice than the talk page of a retired editor. 00:04, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
      • True, but I didn't see anyone bring it there. So let's bring it there. ----DanTD (talk) 00:46, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Kudos

After spending the last couple days reviewing images and categories (with more to do, yet) I'm grateful for the pains you went to along the old Atlantic and Seaboard routes. Those articles were in top-notch shape. Also, congratulations on getting the Chesapeake article written. I can probably contribute a few things there too. Best, Mackensen (talk) 01:22, 29 August 2011 (UTC)