Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the ]. I have found some concerns which you can see at ]. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. ] (]) 15:07, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the ]. I have found some concerns which you can see at ]. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. ] (]) 15:07, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
== Paint it - comma - Black ==
Now I see what the fuss was about. I've restored the article to it's correct place, and speedied the moved pages. And that is considered pagemove vandalism, BTW. <b>]</b> ] 15:23, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
:I don't think you're funny; the tags were put on your page automatically when I speedied the pages; I didn't put them there. Who's the guilty party here? <b>]</b> ] 16:07, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
==] nomination of ]==
] Please do not move pages to nonsensical titles. It is considered ]. If you would like to learn more about moving pages, please see the ] on this subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the Misplaced Pages. Thank you.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding <code>{{tl|hangon}}</code> to '''the top of ]''' (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on ''']''' explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for ''speedy'' deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact ] to request that they ] the page or have a copy emailed to you. <!-- Template:Db-pagemove-notice --> <!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> <b>]</b> ] 15:36, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
==] nomination of ]==
] Please do not move pages to nonsensical titles. It is considered ]. If you would like to learn more about moving pages, please see the ] on this subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the Misplaced Pages. Thank you.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding <code>{{tl|hangon}}</code> to '''the top of ]''' (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on ''']''' explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for ''speedy'' deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact ] to request that they ] the page or have a copy emailed to you. <!-- Template:Db-pagemove-notice --> <!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> <b>]</b> ] 15:36, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Revision as of 16:21, 17 August 2009
JD554
is currently wikibonked and is operating at a lower edit level than usual. Hitting the wall is a temporary condition, and the user should return to normal edit levels in time.
This is JD554's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.
The entire website is in German (one of the official languages of Switzerland, English is not) and clearly gives the name of the charts on the left as "Schweizer Hitparade". Rafablu88 (talk) 09:32, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Noted. In that case, it should be "Swiss Charts" only and not "Swiss Music Chart", with the German wording added in brackets after. Rafablu88 (talk) 10:25, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
This edit removed three comments from the article talk page. No explanation given. Would also appreciate a pointer as to which wikiproject Massive Attack, Portished, Trick, et al belong? Jezhotwells (talk) 19:34, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Robert Smith
Surely, when referring to a person's family, it helps to differentiate between individuals through the use of first names.
It is exasperating that you reverted edits that took well over a half hour because you took a stylistic issue with the use of first names. The edits were carefully thought out and a result of having followed Smith's career for years. I am awaiting an explanation for your policing and your refusal to permit needed clarification. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.35.78 (talk) 08:16, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I reverted your changes because WP:NAMES#Family_members_with_the_same_surname states: "For subsequent uses, refer to relatives by given name for clarity and brevity. When referring to the person who is the subject of the article, use just the surname unless the reference is part of a list of family members or if use of the surname alone will be confusing." (my bold) The way the article was worded wasn't confusing, so there was no need to change Smith to Robert. Also the previous wording was clearer and more encyclopaedic than a number of the other change you made. I can only apologise if you feel exasperated when changes are made, but the caveat at the bottom of the page when you are editing says, "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it." --JD554 (talk) 08:31, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't think academic style and encyclopedic style are incompatible, unless encyclopedias are meant to be redundant and written exclusively for fourth graders. Your fuzzy explanation suggests a careless deletion, rather than a legitimate concern. If you want to be responsible with your policing, invest the time to be more specific next time, and if you don't have the time to be specific, perhaps you should not take on this responsibility. It seems to me that you neglected to pay attention to the edits either because of the stylistic issue you took or perhaps the content of the edits did not suit your personal preferences.
Firstly, the changes I made to the "Early Years" section warranted the use of Smith's first name.
Also in this section it states, "He was an accomplished student who maintained high marks, but after he began playing guitar at the age of 11 his primary focus quickly became his music." Maintaining "high marks" before the age of 11 does not make one an "accomplished student". It is both a laughable and an irrelevant claim. It is sufficient to state that he shifted focus once he started to play the guitar. Also, Smith cites Claude Debussy, Ravel, Satie and Chopin amidst his influences (Guitares et Claviers 1989), and I don't see why you deleted these additions.
Why is the use of Smith's first name warranted? I've shown you why it isn't, but you haven't tried to say why it is. Sure a student can be accomplished before the age of 11, explain why not. If Smith has cited Debussy, Ravel, Satie and Chopin then don't provide a reference here, provide in the text of the article when you add it, see WP:V, WP:RS and WP:CITE.
1) I was referring to the edits you reverted, not the wiki page as it stands: I stated, "the changes I made...warranted the use of Smith's first name." These edits included reorganizing the information chronologically (birth, early education, marriage), adding supplementary details and deleting redundancy. Generally speaking, my choice to refer to an individual by first name or surname depends entirely on the context. You were welcome to revise my edits to state Smith's surname, if you deemed it more appropriate. It would have taken you a minute to make these changes, but you chose to revert the edits in entirety with a click of a button, wielding your wiki power without pause.
2) I had added Debussy to the list of other influences, and I followed the format as it stands on the current Wiki Page. As you may have noticed but chose to ignore in your policing, the entire section needs formatting. I do take your point about my latest edit, however, if your real concern was following wiki formatting, most of this section should be deleted 'cos it clearly does not follow guidelines. but you neither corrected the formatting nor deleted the info altogether, and this tells me your recent reverts were either biased and petty or careless.
3) What made Smith an "accomplished student" before the age of 11? Did he compose a sonata? Did he find a cure for cancer? Did he nurse someone to health? Did he win a wrestling match? Did he rescue a lost cat? Did he win a spelling bee? The wiki page states he received "high marks". Who cares about Smith's "high marks" in the 5th grade? If you think that's relevant, fine, but unless you're a boastful relative of Smith circa 1969, calling him an "accomplished student" based solely on his 5th class "high marks" is comic, especially given that he's a star with an illustrious career that spans over thirty years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.35.78 (talk) 17:47, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Secondly, in the section on "Stage Persona and Image", it states, "Smith helped popularize the "goth" style of dress...."
Smith's "get up", if you will, certainly contributes to his goth image, but it's a far cry to claim that he "helped popularize" the look. This is the sort of mythmaking that Smith finds off-putting, and rightfully so because it collapses him into a category that overlooks his superb wit and playfulness, evident in his oeuvre. He has repeatedly disavowed the goth tag, as cited in the wiki page, and I can provide further examples if needed. If you have data on Robert Smith's influence on goth fashion, by all means, revise my error.
Smith may find it off-putting, but it is what has happened.
4) Your statement is arguable, and while I disagree with you, I don't deny that there is a kernel of truth to it. My point is you are overstating the case.
If you look at footage of The Cure concerts, it is evident that the band attracts an eclectic crowd, unlike say Siouxsie Sioux or Sisters of Mercy. The Cure's Goth following is a minor but conspicuous segment, for obvious reasons.
Maybe the Goth scene across the pond is dead, but Goth teens still hang out in packs in my old neighborhood in New York, so I've had a chance to observe Goth fashion in all its glory first hand. Perhaps we can agree that Goth is a misunderstood subculture, and that there is a philosophy behind Goth fashion, so it isn't just about wearing black. And so, Morrissey who doesn't walk around in smeared lipstick but sings "I wear black on the outside 'cos black is how I feel on the inside" would be a better fit than Smith who's been unequivocal in denying Goth overtones. Also Smith wears red lipstick, which is more about "theatricality" in the vein of Bjork or Bowie and dates back to post-punk, glam and new wave. As Gallup has pointed out Smith never wore black lipstick or painted his nails black. also, i've seen him in sneakers not black boots. And lastly, Smith states, "We were a raincoat band, but we were never goth. A lot of the photos of me wearing a rosary or a crucifix or something is exclusive to the eighteen-month period that I was playing with the Banshees, because they determined that I should wear their uniform, which I had to go along with because it wasn't my group" (Details July 1997).
As an aside, since when is EW photo gallery a sound source? I don't doubt you'll find many in "respectable" music press who are either lazy of thought or stupid enough to overlook the breadth of The Cure's oeuvre and Smith's persona and conflate it into Goth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.35.78 (talk) 18:05, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
On that note, Smith wrote "Lovesong" as wedding present for Mary Poole, whom he dated at fifteen and married a decade later, and she makes a brief appearance in "Just Like Heaven" and "Mint Car" videos. It's a sweet detail that also complicates his "miserable" image, and I'm having trouble understanding your issue with it.
A sweet detail it may be, but this is an encyclopaedia, suffice to say he married her. The "Love Song" wedding present is more pertinent to Love Song
5) Way to invent random rules. If you're going to make that argument, why list his siblings, why mention his "high marks"? These particulars about Poole, Smith put forth, are relevant to his biography because they offer a brief detail of her influence on his work and complicate his image. She is mentioned only in relevance to Smith. see Obama's wiki page for example; it is locked for editing.
Lastly, I updated Smith's literary references in the "Songwriting Style" section and replaced vague language such as "themes of depression" with more specific terms such as trauma, despair and resignation. And I added the theme of faith, which is also apparent in his work during the pornography era. If you want to further refine the terms, that's fair (I understand that's how[REDACTED] works, and thank you anyway for belaboring the obvious in your response). but your compulsion to revert to fuzzy language leaves me puzzled. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.35.78 (talk) 11:12, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
6) It tells me little about why or how his music is "sad". I'm hardly calling for Dickensian detail, but "simply saying depression" is so broad an umbrella term that it is rendered superficial and cliché.
Excuse me?
You just posted this on my page:
" Please stop. Continuing to remove maintenance templates from pages on Misplaced Pages, as you did to Swords (album), without resolving the problem that the template refers to may be considered vandalism. Further edits of this type may result in you being blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. JD554 (talk) 14:39, 2 June 2009 (UTC)"
My edit to that article was adding one thing. I added ONE thing: the "No_cover.png" image, since there currently is no album cover. What are you talking about? Adding the no cover art image to a template I have done countless times previously. Vandalism? Right, dude. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan-S79 (talk • contribs) 08:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I just realized that the singles from the latest Killers album feature fresco portraits of all the band members as sleeve designs. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:18, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
One of my favorite pasttimes on Misplaced Pages these days is browsing through food articles, seeking out deliciousness I'd like to try. Any UK-specific recommendations? So far I'm not too impressed with Yorkshire pudding. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:17, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Also: Tin Machine? Not as great as the article would have you believe. Bowie might have been listening to the Pixies at the time, but Tin Machine sounds like a third-rate retread of his glam days with terrible 80s production. I'm watching the videos on YouTube right now and am thoroughly not impressed. I count at least two videos that contain a gratuitous amount of audience member stage-diving. In 1989! Definitely trying too hard. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:18, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hey, not sure if you could help, but I'm trying to track down verification that the Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs edition of Reckoning was a remastered recording. I've scoured my book and found nothing, and I can't find anything online about the release at all aside from record store listings and eBay auctions, so I doubt the wisdom of even mentioning it in the article without decent sources. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:24, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Re: my tracklist discourse. I got "Radio Friendly Unit Shifter" mixed up with "Gallons of Rubbing Alcohol . . ." Forgive me, for I am often up late. Regardless, secondary source material on the "Radio Friendly Unit Shifter" is scant, which most of the details being what specific day it was recorded, and the fact that it's really noisy, which is true of like half the album. From a macro view (which is how I always approach album articles, since they are complete whole works, and because not every song will garner substantial commentary), it not being mentioned in the article isn't the end of the world, because the article would still fulfill FA criteria 1b, as a result of FA criteria 1c. Yeah, the song is on the album, which is self-evident, but then again, the fact that the album is packaged in a clear plastic CD tray is self-evident too, if you get my analogy. However, the fact that "Gallons of Rubbing Alcohol . . ." is a bonus track on non-US copies of the album, and is the only recording to appear on the album not recorded with Steve Albini is notable, so that's noted in the prose, even if the song itself is not notable enough to warrant its own article. By the way, I hope people (including you) get what I'm trying to do with the tracklisting discussion, namely to get our collective selves to explicitly delineate why we need something that we've taken for granted for so long as mandatory for album pages without anyone stopping to think and say "Why?". I mean, I'm not trying to be a dick . . . WesleyDodds (talk) 10:18, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, it's one of those things that's "obvious" but not necessarily notable. I used to post on a Nirvana message board, and when that song first came out, everyone pointed out the similarity. But a bunch of fan chatter does not mean something is true or even verifiable, of course. This is how Wiki guidelines have improved my life! WesleyDodds (talk) 11:59, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, an odd thing is all the sources I read about Nevermind focus on how it brought alt-rock as a whole to a mainstream, and not specifically grunge; it's probably because it's assumed. The 1993 New York Times article on grunge probably says something about it. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:55, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm trying to figure out what the proper cleanup tag to add to this would be. I doubt the main site indicated as a reference is a RS at all. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:59, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
"Well, I remember hearing girls behind me in English class talking about turning 18 and being old enough to strip. It wasn't that weird at the time.'" - Brandon Flowers
Project news
John Frusciante and U2 were featured on the Main Page on May 2 and 26.
Link titleYou reverted my edit about adding the category People from Skipton from the article commenting there is no need for this. Why not? There is a section in the article about notable people born there so why not refer people to the category which lists them and more? Note that the format of my edit did not add the article on Skipton to the category. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nthep (talk • contribs) 12:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Because it isn't normal to use categories as "see also" items. Anyone listed in the category who isn't in the article should be added, it is then redundant to point to a category which simply lists the people. --JD554 (talk) 13:15, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Have a look at Bradford#Notable Bradfordians. By your argument all 240 people in the Category:People from Bradford should be listed in the main article. Or the article on Leeds where 359 names should be listed. Neither of these articles do that. Instead one refers to the category (ok in the section to which it relates not the see also) and the other a separate article List of people from Leeds. By a rigid adherence to what you say all categories that are lists of people from XYZ are redundant because the names they contain should appear in the article relating about XYZ. NtheP (talk) 14:04, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I agree in principle but at what point does it become too many? Using the category at least keeps the article up to date with additions made to the category. NtheP (talk) 14:16, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Jonas Retards
I didn't create a page titled "Jonas Retards", I just made a redirect of that title to the Jonas Brothers page. Someone else must of created it Cause I Didn't. Also some one put on a redirect link to the Jonas Brothers page that they "Suck ass".--Das Ansehnlisch (talk) 13:59, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
You can 2 list promo singles. They do qualify as singles. These ones on the DD album pages had a pysical release, so just leave the promo singles listed.Das Ansehnlisch (talk) 16:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Those promo singles had a pysical release they sold (I'm pretty sure about the latter) or DJs would have them. They weren't not just radio only singles. The bands only radio only promo was "The Krush Brothers LSD Edit" which I didn't list because (1. it's a radio only single and (2. the site where I got my info (no it's not a fansite) dosen't list it. Sorry, I didn't mean to talk to you like an idiot. Apology accepted?.
Civilization Phaze III References -> Notes_Notes-2009-06-11T17:42:00.000Z">
You said this edit was unnecessary. I'm sorry, but a translation of the name of a song isn't a reference. It's a note. "Notes" is the proper name for that section. ≤≥17:42, 11 June 2009 (UTC)_Notes">
_Notes">
Well, first of all, it's <references />, not </references>. It's not an HTML tag you're closing. Second, it doesn't work, it just shows a blank space. ≤≥20:53, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Never realized so much could still be done. Just had a query. A "band" should be singular, I think, they're ONE entity. Shouldn't "has" be used, instead of "hasn't"? Suede67 (talk) 18:33, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
The Man Who Sold the World
Hey, its been a long time. Shouldn't The Man Who Sold the World direct to the album rather than the song? Its more logical that way, and I think that's the standard practice too. Also, you should start moving stuff from your temp page to ]. Even if you aren't done with it yet, the temp page is currently a million times better than the actual article itself :) indopug (talk) 12:59, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi mate, I was wondering, having seen your great work on the David Bowie discography, if you could help me with trying to take List of number-one singles from the 1980s (UK) to featured list status. I need some help on writing a lede, finding suitable pictures. I am also having trouble with the table at the bottom of the article, with 4 charity singles released in the 1980s. Let me know on my talk page if you can help. Thanks. 03md01:03, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
"The only confusion was, I think we all thought they were women. Kim was obviously a woman, but they all had this shaved-headed, pretty, soft look. And there were lots of lesbian bands at the time, and we always got booked with them, so we just thought the Pixies were another, like maybe they were like angry divorcees or somthing that formed a band.'" - Kristin Hersh
i dunno why you reverted my edit to that article about that shitty coldplay song. it was not vandalism, it's a bonafide fact. look it up.99.153.29.112 (talk) 07:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
On July 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article David Bowie discography, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Merge/separation of different versions of same song
As somebody who appears to be interested in song articles you might be interested to know there is a discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Songs/coverversions with the purpose of trying to establish a standard rule for merge/separation of different versions of the same song. You are invited to comment. Regards,--Richhoncho (talk) 08:28, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
So when exactly was the week ban supposed to end? I think our friend may have jumped the gun, but would like a second opinion before doing anything, or perhaps just let it rest. I also re-added 2007 as the end of the years active with a weak citation (the Contact Music slug about the Mojo article); was there more on when New Order split in the Mojo article? -- Foetusized (talk) 22:42, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Sockpuppetry
Dear Sir or Ma'am... After looking up what in the heck sockpuppetry could mean, and reading the evidence, I am finding it hard to not be angry. I have been a long time reader of Misplaced Pages, although rarely an editor, and so never set up an account. I recently noticed that information on the Wayne Massey page had disappeared and so viewed the history and became compelled to chime in because I thought what was happening was wrong. I therefore set up an account to be able to effectively communicate my views in discussion. Simple as that. Looks like you want to discredit any descenting views. (Cdmass (talk) 21:03, 26 July 2009 (UTC))
Strawberry Swing
Hey, this was a while ago, but it wasn't really appropriate to give Dans a last warning for that first personal attack, because he just said a simple "screw you", which while definitely inappropriate, was not grounds for a warning that tells him he gets blocked the next time he does it. A better warning would have been a level 2 or 3, and some more communication next time, other than a templated warning. Fingerz02:51, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Ahh, ok, the rationale behind placing the last warning makes more sense now. I started a thread on ANI about it, because Dans launched another personal attack after you left the last warning on his page, but I was unsure of whether the final warning was warranted, so I took it to ANI so the admins could discuss about whether to block. The thread is at WP:ANI#Personal Attacks made on Talk:Strawberry Swing. You might want to explain your rationale for placing the final warning on his page, because some editors consider the seemingly overly harsh warning as a reason for not blocking. Fingerz15:21, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Dear JD554, Even though Strawberry Swing is protected untill..well I guess it actualy becomes a single. I do have a article that I made in my sandbox and I would like you to check it out and tell me what else is missing and if there is anything that I can do to make it better. I plan on putting the article on the real Strawberry Swing page once the single officialy comes out. feel free to edit it if you wish. (It would be nice if I had the cover art, but I dont know how to do that) User:Coldplay Expert/Strawberry Swing Thanks!--Coldplay Expert (talk) 23:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Fair Use Message
Hi there - re your message today, I assume you mean I need to use one of these new templates, rather than using plain text for the rationale? At the time the picture was uploaded, such templates were not mandatory, that's why it isn't there. Can you help me out by linking me to the right template? Or at least to the page where such templates live? Cheers. :-) --DaveG12345 (talk) 12:30, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
OK, I think I fixed that and so I removed the CSD tag, but let me know if you see any other issues that invalidate this tag removal - somebody had shoved this image onto British Rock - which was obviously an invalid use, and so I have removed it from there, and edit summary asks them not to replace it without discussion first. Cheers again for the help. --DaveG12345 (talk) 21:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Bowie discography
Here we go:
BPI Certified Awards 1989: Tin Machine Gold, no awards for TMII in 1991.
BPI Certified Awards 1997: Earthling Silver, there's a further column which states Gold but with no date.
These are from internal print data but you can cite the pdf files online as they all follow the same nomenclature. See my A Weekend in the City cite. Rafablu8823:07, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for those. Sorry to be a pain, but are there similar PDFs for the other ones I already have listed? --JD554 (talk) 07:52, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
TBH, I don't know what to tell you. In all probability, yes. But, I don't know if the search you did only brought up the awards data or the sales. If it's awards, then you can cite them the same way, but if not then I suggest you keep them as they are and add Note: Subscription required to the ref, especially considering you (and maybe others) had witnessed such information to be true at the source before it became non-free. I'm sure no-one would be complain. I wouldn't. Rafablu8814:40, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Actually I was responsible for the original comments (made from a different computer though), and I deleted them after plucking up the courage to amend the article, as I answered my own question. I think I improved the article - and I cited my sources. Hope this is OK, regards Lee86.142.138.187 (talk) 17:30, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Now I see what the fuss was about. I've restored the article to it's correct place, and speedied the moved pages. And that is considered pagemove vandalism, BTW. Radiopathy•talk•15:23, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
I don't think you're funny; the tags were put on your page automatically when I speedied the pages; I didn't put them there. Who's the guilty party here? Radiopathy•talk•16:07, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Please do not move pages to nonsensical titles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to learn more about moving pages, please see the guidelines on this subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Misplaced Pages. Thank you.
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 page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Radiopathy•talk•15:36, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Please do not move pages to nonsensical titles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to learn more about moving pages, please see the guidelines on this subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Misplaced Pages. Thank you.
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 page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Radiopathy•talk•15:36, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
User talk:JD554: Difference between revisions
Add topic
