User talk:Nuttah/Archive/Archive 01

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

Archive 01[edit]

Wellness, By Nature, Addiction Foods[edit]

Why are you nominating these for speedy deletion when this could have been discussed? Also on one you give a large .pdf link for copyright violation instead of pointing out what specific area is a copyright violation. You don't seem to be a creator, just a deletionist. The Addiction Foods could have been expanded upon due to unique ingredients. Noles1984 16:24, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

St. Andrew's School[edit]

I agree. I had just caught my mistake and headed back to correct it. You had already done so. Thanks! --Stormbay 17:27, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Your speedy tag on Bear Mountain (resort)[edit]

Why are you requesting a deletion on a legit article about a legit community in Langford? It's not just a golf course and hotel out here, you know. And it's all facts here, at least. If I were advertising, I think I would have said "this stunning community is a once-in-a-lifetime ownership opportunity" or some crap like that. Instead, I think I did a pretty good job of staying neutral despite the fact that it could very well turn into an advertisement. You may think its blatant advertising, but my intention is not to advertise. So instead of speedy deletion, I think we should look at other ways of editing the article to make it more palatable. Bluefox 06:59, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Your attention requested regarding NK Radnik's article[edit]

Please see my comments at Talk:NK Radnik#Removal of claim to notability?. I look forward to your reply there. BigNate37(T) 17:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

PAC[edit]

It claims to be notable. whether it is or not will depend upon the press coverage. the thing to do here, as in other dubious cases, is to first check for possible copyvio, and then look for additional references yourself -- try Google News-- and if you cannot find them, nominate them for AfD saying you could not find references. It goes much smoother that way. DGG (talk) 20:35, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Aaron Bock[edit]

Hi there. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Just want to let you know that Aaron Bock does have some notable items associated with it, but they are currently hidden until a dispute is resolved. For more information, see User_talk:MrPrada/Archive_1. Thanks. MrPrada 12:56, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Under construction[edit]

Thanks for paying attention to these tags! Glad someone remembered to work on them. There is no fixed time specified for them, but personally, I think 7 days is long enough. I could also see 5, the same as for proposed deletion. Just want to remind you to write informative edit summaries, especially when proposing for deletion or adding or removing a tag--it helps us overworked admins see what's been happening when we come to delete them. 16:37, 26 July 2007 (UTC) --one more thing, please remember to notify the author of the page, & I'd suggest also the person who placed the tag--seems only fair, though not strictly required. (and non-notable only applies to real people etc.,not fictional characters or mascots--the tag to use for them is prod.)

Tagging of The Hatfield House[edit]

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on The Hatfield House. I do not think that The Hatfield House fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because bars and other real places are not realy covered by WP:CSD#A7, which is limited to articles about "a real person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content". Even if bars did fall under A7, the link with the titanic, suggesting this is to soem extant a historic location, adn the list of celebrity regulars would be at least claims of significance, IMO. DES (talk) 21:01, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

If you think it's spam, tag with db-spam -- it has some rather spammy content, but i con't think it constitutes blatent advertising. Note that under A7, any halfway plausibel claim of significance prevents a speedy -- which is assuming that an A7 can even apply to an articel about a bar, which i don't think it can. If you think this should go, i suggest {{prod}} or AfD. DES (talk) 21:20, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Because an article about a bar is generally, at least in part, an article about a physical place. Articles about places are not subject to A7. A bar, a school, and any of several other types of establishment combine a buisness and a place. The A7 expansion that took in buisness was focused on articles about busisness as such -- articles that dealt with the buisneses' modes of operation, products, and the like. Many, perhaps most notable bars are notable in significant part for their physical settings, in many cases the setting itelf is historic. DES (talk) 21:28, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Speedy tags on Lee Baker, Jack Compton, Ade Manchester[edit]

Hi, I removed the {{db-bio}} tags you put on these three articles, as they all assert the importance of the articles' subjects, by mentioning that they are all on professional contracts at West Bromwich Albion F.C., a club in the second-highest division of English football. See WP:A7 for the rationale you gave. We have many, many articles on young footballers with professional contracts - just look at any article of a football club, and look at the high shirt numbers, and there will be newly-signed youngsters with contracts. If you still feel that these articles should be deleted (though I have no idea why you went for those three in particular), then take it to WP:AfD. --Dreaded Walrus t c 19:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Prod. on Comparison of antivirus software[edit]

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Comparison of antivirus software, which you proposed for deletion, because I think that this article should not be deleted from Wikipedia. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! KTC 23:53, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Douglas Chapman[edit]

I think that holding a political office is at least an *assertion* of notability that takes a subject out of speedy category a7. I have no problem with a prod or AFD nomination. NawlinWiki 12:17, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Sir James Kilfedder[edit]

I think the Outrage! blackmail issue is widely known, referenced and should be included. The piece about the school-boy should, obviously not be, however. What do you think? --Counter-revolutionary 17:28, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Hullo, I fail to see what all the fuss is about. A respected writer (McKinstry) publishes an account of an incident in the life of a respected statesman (JK) in a respected publication (The Spectator). Did you miss this reference? Once something like this is published it becomes valid source material, on the same footing with other bona fide biographical material. The only way "personal recollection" can be excluded from the Wikipedia is if it your or mine and has not been published. Haiduc 20:06, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Definitely not an acceptable ref with which to label Kilfedder, SqueakBox 20:12, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
You are both off base. McKinstry is a respected, award winning author writing on British politics and published by major publishing houses on both sides of the Atlantic. He is not "self-published". Haiduc 20:24, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Prove it. Haiduc 20:33, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I now read that page. The operative words are "any reader should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source." The reliable source third party source here is The Spectator, which, by publishing McKinstry lends him the authority of their name. The fact that the author is himself demonstrably reliable and respected only reinforces the validity of his contribution, but is not necessary from our point of view. A scoundrel's words, printed in The Spectator, become valid source material for us. Haiduc 20:48, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Portsmouth F.C.[edit]

Whilst I do not dispute the reasoning behind your earlier club shop links reverts at Portsmouth F.C., your 7 reverts to remove this were clearly in breach of WP:3RR. I've had a look at the page and maybe this page could also be useful for you. [[1]] Keep up the good work!

Cloudz679 18:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. After reviewing WP:3RR#Exceptions, I can see your interpretation although the page is too ambiguous in my opinion, regarding what constitutes an exception. I'm glad you managed to put a stop to the edit war with your reasoning though. Thanks!

Cloudz679 22:04, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Hamnavoe Gallery[edit]

I was wondering why you have tagged the Hamnavoe Gallery in Aberdeen for speedy deletion? This is an article about Aberdeen and this is a gallery in Aberdeen. There are other galleries in Aberdeen, and museums too, so I am not sure I understand why this one should be deleted.

I have stuck by submission guidelines and not added any details about opening times or other commercial details so if you could let me know what the problem is I will try to rectify it asap. thanks. Melana 22:20, 5 August 2007 (UTC)Melana 23:15 Aug 5th 2007


Hi Me again, and I have read through the message you left me. Thanks for that. Ok one of the reasons that I wanted to write an article about this gallery in Aberdeen is because they show the work of Steven Campbell, 'the greatest living scottish painter' - a quote from the Scotsman Newspaper not by me! This is an amazing thing that a gallery in aberdeen is showing his work as he is represented by the biggest gallery group in the world - Marlborough! So for him to show in a little gallery in the north east of scotland i thought was quite amazing but to write an article about him was hard and I needed a cross reference to the gallery.

Ok as to the verifiable thingy, Professor Duncan McMillan wrote a review of Steven Campbell showing at the Hamnavoe Gallery. Would that constitute news coverage? there have been a few editorials in the aberdeen papers too? I have started to re-write the article on the Gallery on my pc but haven't tried to re-publish it. Any further help would be GREATLY appreciated. Melana 09:22, 12 August 2007 (UTC)Melana

Hi I won't be writing the article for a while now as the Scottish Artist Steven Campbell died last week and this has upset the whole art world. He was one of the main reasons that I wanted to have an article about the Hamnavoe Gallery as this is one of the few places that you can get his work. It was a sad day that he died so I will leave it just now. I will ask for your help maybe when I do re-submit it, if thats ok. Melana 22:46, 22 August 2007 (UTC)Melana


List of pubs in Balmain[edit]

You recently put a {{prod}} tag on List of pubs in Balmain. Just a quick reminder that as per WP:PROD, this tag is not appropriate for articles that have been the subject of an AfD in the past, as this one had been. Mark Chovain 20:26, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Liverpool[edit]

OMG, I accidentaly re-added vandalism, sorry. It's early in the morning I guess I have to wake up propper first. 1redrun Talk 10:17, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Hypno5e[edit]

Hi, as you probably know, you placed a speedy deletion tag on the article on Hypno5e. I believe that the deletion of the article was not without controversy and that it should have been deleted through AfD, for I have cited sources on that article. May I know your opinion on the issue? Thanks in advance. Zouavman Le Zouave 06:11, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Three days after the above message has been sent, I would think an answer would be appropriate. Can I know why you think Hypno5e should have been speedily deleted? I still think that the article should have been deleted through AfD, but you might be able to show me evidence that the article was conform to the Criteria for Speedy Deletion. Thanks in advance. Zouavman Le Zouave 08:57, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Marija Skalovska/Todor Skalovski[edit]

When you see the AFDs ([2], [3]), you'll know why I am apologizing profusely. Sorry again. Watchingthevitalsigns 14:19, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

JkDefrag AfD[edit]

Hi, I was just wondering what expertise you have in the field of Windows Optimisation software to know whether the JkDefrag page is notable software or not? Just curious RitaSkeeter 20:31, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your clarification, but I still don't see why a product as notable as JkDefrag should fail the notability test when the latest literature on the subject predates the public availability of the product. Surely more time is needed before nuking the article? RitaSkeeter 22:02, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Perumkadavila[edit]

Hi there. I don't know whether the author is trying to list people, political divisions on a map, or what. As it stands, I don't understand the importance of this article. - CobaltBlueTony 19:16, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Schafer House[edit]

Hi I just recently noticed your proposed deletion of the UCL accomodation articles. I agree in retrospect that the individual buildings do not warrant their own article and so deletion/merging is a good idea. However it would be nice if in future deletions etc you could nominate the creator of the article (in these examples me). It is considered courtesy to nominate the articles key contributors and creator when proposing an afd. As it happens I am not able to comment on the schafer house article, ergo its pointless me commenting on the other two ucl residences. Next time please let the creator known when you nominate for afd. Many thanks. LordHarris 12:34, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

speedies[edit]

When you mark an article for speedy, say so in the edit summary. It helps the review admins pick up the correct edit. The speedy on Shmuel Yanai was declined -- by another admin--and quite correctly. It is just necessary to make a claim of importance to prevent speedy as nn, and the assertion of leadership in the Palmach was quite sufficient for that--any plausible claim is. It is also considered polite to notify the people involved most with the article. DGG (talk) 23:22, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Thanks, Jimfbleak 10:56, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Gary Hayes[edit]

You were the editor who started the deletion discussion for the Gary Hayes article, which was later closed with consensus to delete. Just informing you that there's a deletion review for the article here: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 October 18#Gary Hayes. Resurgent insurgent 02:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

PROD[edit]

Per the guidance at WP:PROD, you should Use an informative edit summary clearly indicating that the article has been nominated for deletion whenever you add the proposed deletion template to an article. I noticed that most of your nominations neglect to use the edit summary box at all. Neier 07:03, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Metabo[edit]

Yesterday you put up this article for speedy deletion. I saw right away that this was a (very) notable German manufacturer, known all over Europe. I've added more information and references, so as to present an acceptable article. I'm asking you now to remove the CSD template. As an admin, I could do it myself, but I rather have your agreement. JoJan 19:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar![edit]

Barnstar of Reversion2.png The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I hereby award User Nuttah68 the RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for their diligence in reverting vandalism on Bishop Gore School. Great Job! That vandal was persistent! Keep up the awesome work! :) ✬Dillard421✬ (talkcontribs) 18:57, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Footballer for deletion[edit]

Hi, I noticed that you proposed deletion of Collins from Template:Kettering Town F.C. squad. If I understand correctly, once a PROD is removed, if there is still a case for deletion, the article should go to WP:AFD rather than be PRODded again. I'll let the Admin decide that. Anyway, having nominated that one, you may want to look at other non-notables on that template or in the same categories. - Fayenatic (talk) 20:09, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

deathkiller (band)[edit]

well, apparently there are plenty of people who are unhappy with your tagging of their pages for deletion. Your observations are way of base (in this case), as the subject or components thereof are referenced elsewhere throughout wikipedia. If you had done a bit more homework, you would have realized this. I am going to redo the page for deathkiller (band). Please do not tag it for speedy deletion. If you have further issues regarding this, please contact me first before excercising what seems to be a gratuitous and widespread display of presumptuousness and careless "editing".

The Drag[edit]

well, i can see from your talk page that you have made yourself the unofficial 'notoriety' monitor. i'm not sure of your criteria, but going by WP's The Drag is a notable place in Austin, TX. It is a cultural icon, while i may not have conveyed that very well other editors may be able to. Please do not mark the page for deletion again. Also, you are supposed to notify the creator of the article, thanks.ron-neg-ron

HIDING WITH GIRLS[edit]

  • Has gone on an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one large or medium-sized country,[1] reported in notable and verifiable sources.

Toured with: Mad Capsule Markets, Sikth,


  • Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable).

- released album on Mighty Atom Funeral for a friend


  • Has been featured in multiple non-trivial published works in reliable and reputable media (excludes things like school newspapers, personal blogs, etc...).

featured in Kerrang (biggest selling weekly music magazine in the world) on numerous occassions, Metal Hammer, Terrorizor, Rock Sound and many more

  • Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast on a national radio network.

-recoreded a Radio One Session


thanks for trying, but know about what you are talking about next time :) thanks anyway, people like you make Wikipedia SO GOOD...thanks you rock..thanks

HELLO !!![edit]

Hi. Can you please let me know why you are trying to delete my contributions on Total Correlation and Interaction information. Let's communicate, please!

Once more: Interaction information & Total Correlation[edit]

From the talk page:

Response: Dear Nuttah68, a Ph.D. thesis typically contains a long literature review. The contents of these two articles are adapted from the lit review section of my thesis. The relevant sources are all given on the article pages. Why are we having this discussion? What part exactly do you feel is original research? Let me know, and I will try to address it. Otherwise, please un-flag these articles. Thanks much.

Amy Macdonald[edit]

I'd like to know why, around a month ago, you requested an article I started on Amy Macdonald to be 'speedily deleted'. What may not seem notable to you is notable to others. My understanding of the concept of wikipedia is that it is an online encyclopedia where people share information that may be of interest to others, and that is quite clearly what the article was doing. She is an increasingly well-know songwriter, whether or not you've heard of her is really irrelevant. It seems to me a blatant abuse of your authority. The article has been restarted by someone else, anyway. Gonna delete it again? Jimm 89


Abbeygreen Church[edit]

It is proposed that this article be deleted because of the following concern: Non notable church
The Abbeygreen Church lies on the site of Lesmahagow Priory and, although not a major church, gives continuity of worship on this historic site and also distinguishes it from Lesmahagow Old Parish Church. I have added the information about the active church to the old priory page with a redirect to retain old references. Expansion of both of those pages would probably have been preferable but my contribution was only to try and clear up some confusion on several previous pages about Lesmahagow and absoulute removal of valid information always seems over reaction to a stub.

sorry just making a point[edit]

it is just egghead08 believes that wayne rooney and michael owen needn't be mentioned on the page because it is not an newspaper. i believe that they shouold be mentioned because they are englands first choice strikers and if and team members are mentioned then they should.