Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:36, 25 June 2009

Archives

• /Archive 1
• /Archive 2
• /Archive 3
• /Archive 4
• /Archive 5

All I can do at this point is /facepalm

Barack Obama fly swatting incident ? Really? I've rubbed my eyes several times, hoping it would be like sleepy seeds and go away, but no, it is still there. You know full well that this won't stand a chance at AfD. Please, save a lot of time and effort all around and slap a {{db-author}} on the article and the half-dozen redirects. Author-requested SDs are automatically granted. Tarc (talk) 12:37, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Please remember that you also nominated Gerald Walpin firing for deletion, but so far, the discussion seems to be headed in favor of keep. Grundle2600 (talk) 13:47, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, it seems to be heading for is a merging of info from the firing article, if any is usable, into the main Gerald Walpin bio. Still doesn't seem like much of a significant person to stand on his own, but its better than this firing article absurdity.

As for the fly-swatting, didn't you learn your lesson from the "Michelle's arms" article? About how just being "sourced" is not an argument and not a valid reason for the creation of an article. I ask again; please consider calling for a deletion yourself, and save us a week-long AfD. If not, I will have to resort to putting it up for AfD in a few hours, unless someone beats me to it. Tarc (talk) 16:49, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Gerald Walpin never had his own article until I created it as a redirect to the firing article. Check the history for yourself. I like the article about the fly incident, and I think it's notable, so I won't propose it for deletion. Others may disagree, perhaps even enough to reach a consensus, perhaps not. You may end up being surprised at the results of the consensus if you nominate it, or you may get exactly the results that you expect. Grundle2600 (talk) 18:50, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Barack Obama fly swatting incident

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Barack Obama fly swatting incident, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Non-notable incident and a WP:COATRACK article.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not" and Misplaced Pages'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. Brothejr (talk) 12:45, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not a coatrack. In case you didn't notice, the article is very kind of the president. The article is well sourced, and the incident is notable. Grundle2600 (talk) 13:42, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Barack Obama fly swatting incident

A tag has been placed on Barack Obama fly swatting incident, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

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. SMP0328. (talk) 19:24, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

And two minutes after your nomination for deletion, someone else unnominated it, claiming that your justification for deletion was not accurate. Grundle2600 (talk) 19:31, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Barack Obama fly swatting incident

I have nominated Barack Obama fly swatting incident, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Barack Obama fly swatting incident. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. SMP0328. (talk) 19:30, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I voted for keep on the deletion discussion page. Grundle2600 (talk) 19:36, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Your latest article on Hohle Fels flute

Look up Geißenklösterle. It might be helpful.--The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 01:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

PS: If you need or want further help regarding this article and info that is provided in non-English WP's just ask me (here or on my talk page). I'm not an expert when it comes to German language but I certainly can help, although I might not be able to respond ASAP as I'm not online (with time on hand) on a daily bases.--The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 02:19, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. That article was started first, and it already mentions the flute, so I'm going to redirect the article that I started to it, and add the info there. Grundle2600 (talk) 02:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. Furthermore, the German article on Aurignacian has a lot more detail (including the earliest findings of flutes in 1988 and 1990). Unfortunately they don't always give citations as we do but there are some.--The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 02:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again. It's good that others are interested in this too. I suppose there could be dozens of other articles with names that I don't know. I like how the current news says that since Neanderthals didn't play music, that could have been one factor in why they disappeared and we didn't. Grundle2600 (talk) 02:40, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

There is a possibility I guess :) --The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 02:50, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

It was also already mentioned at Prehistoric music. Grundle2600 (talk) 02:51, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that flute fits into more than one article. The question would be which one should be the "main" for it. Hard to decide and quite frankly I don't think a separate article is needed. But I must admit that besides my interest in it I didn't dig far enough into the subject to make the call. Besides, it's bedtime for me. I'll try to check on this when I have time.--The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 03:03, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Wow

Did someone compromise your account  ? Just kidding. Good call and a big surprise if you ask me. Cheers, --The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 02:52, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

No, it's me. I watched the first few minutes of the show. The first question from an audience member was enough to convince me that the show is not biased, which means it's not noteworthy. Thanks. Grundle2600 (talk) 02:54, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'll make up my mind after it aired ;) --The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 03:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

AN/I

Hello, Grundle2600. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Tarc (talk) 05:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

"May have been involved"? Ha ha! Very funny! Grundle2600 (talk) 10:20, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Topic ban

I am not going to engage in a point by point rebuttal. While you may have made some good contributions, and some of your edits may have been judged unfairly, this is outweighed by other clearly problematic editing issues, and your general approach. Following discussion, it is now enacted that you are banned from editing any articles related to U.S. politics and politicians, for a period of 3 months. You are permitted to make suggestions and engage in discussion on article talk pages, provided you are civil and respectful of others. The topic ban will be enforced by escalating blocks. If and when the Arbcom review of the Obama article community probation is completed, you can request a review of this topic ban. Thatcher 14:36, 25 June 2009 (UTC)