User talk:Yoshi675

Speedy deletion of Phil Cutrone

A tag has been placed on Phil Cutrone requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Booglamay (talk) 22:46, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Phil Cutrone, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, such as Phil Cutrone, you will be blocked from editing. _GB^T/C 22:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July 2008

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you create an inappropriate page, you will be blocked from editing. ... discospinster _talk 00:56, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Phillip Cutrone

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Phillip Cutrone, 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. CalendarWatcher (talk) 21:47, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Phillip J. Cutrone

A tag has been placed on Phillip J. Cutrone requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. Grika Ⓣ 19:41, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you create an inappropriate page, such as Philip J. Cutrone, you will be blocked from editing. --Finngall ^talk 23:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(copying reply from the article talk page in case that gets deleted before you see it there)

I see nothing here that satisfies the notability guidelines at WP:BIO. And apparently the four different administrators who have deleted seven previous incarnations of this article (see Phil Cutrone, Phillip Cutrone, and Phillip J. Cutrone) agree. Either provide better references, or give it up, already. --Finngall ^talk 23:56, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Read the notability guidelines for biographies, particularly the section specifically dealing with entertainers. Provide verifiable references to reliable sources that demonstrate that the subject meets these notability guidelines. All we have here so far is someone who has received a sentence's worth of notice in the Times in a supporting role in a single off-Broadway production. Are there any articles about him? He may be a nice guy and a good actor, but I don't think you haven't shown so far that he merits inclusion in an encyclopedia. If you have any other questions, let me know. --Finngall ^talk 01:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have the power to delete pages myself; I'm not an administrator, so I'll leave the decision to those who are.

Regarding notability: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a free web host. We have to draw a line somewhere, otherwise we'd be buried in articles about every startup company, every high-schooler saying "look at me!!!!", and every crappy wannabe band on six continents. The notability guidelines are not set in stone, but they have been arrived at after literally years of discussion and represent the editing community's current consensus where that line should be. Furthermore, this goes hand-in-hand with an even more important principle--verifiability. As an encyclopedia, all information herein should be backed up with proper sources. Without verifiable information, there is simply no basis for an encyclopedia article.

To be sure, there's plenty of sub-par articles out there. Some get flagged for improvements, some get tagged for deletion, and many simply get overlooked (which is why arguments on the order of "we have an article on X, therefore we should have an article on Y" carry practically no weight around here). This article isn't even a borderline case, and I can't simply "let it slide" and I doubt any admins will either, though I've been wrong before. If he gets more substantial coverage in the future, then maybe there will be enough there for him to merit an article then, but if you can't find anything now, then there's no sense fighting it--recreating the same article over and over without improving the content will get you blocked, and the title may get protected so that nobody can create the article again.

Hope this helps. Take care. --Finngall ^talk 07:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]