Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Orange typewriter (talk | contribs) at 19:25, 14 December 2005 (→Hans Wehr). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archived: October-November 2005

Mende Nazer

I've expanded Mende Nazer and added references. Do you still want to delete it? -- Dalbury 01:01, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Chugchucaras

Please be a little more careful when tagging articles as "nonsense" when they can simply be wikified. It can be very offensive to newbie contributors. Kappa 17:02, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

speedy

You might want to tag Emaduddin Ahmad as well, same author generated Jalaluddin Md. Abdul Hye and Sharifuzzaman Choudhury. --Ragib 23:24, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: Speedy deletion of bands

Yes, I was reading A7 to include bands. Technically, since they are composed of people, I thought bands would qualify (I mean, most of these non-notable band pages are just bios of the creators more or less). I guess that is an incorrect interpretation... though it is too bad they don't qualify for speedy. Going through an AfD for a band (or anything really) that is clearly non-notable and doesn't even bother to assert notability is a pain in the ass. I agree it should be changed. Thanks for the heads up, though! I'll be sure to not speedy any bands... from now on. -Parallel or Together ? 23:46, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I fully agree that they should be speediable; it missed passing by 1% in the last vote :( Stifle 23:47, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Gingerfield

Hi Stifle, they are all cut-paste jobs of Garfield articles with the names changed. I will state this next time. - Randwicked 11:44, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Mary Welsh Hemingway

Please be more careful in your considerations when you apply speedy tags. I'm not sure whether you read the above article or not, or googled the lady in question, but I hope you would agree that being married to Ernest Hemingway is at the very least an assertion of notability. Steve block talk 11:58, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I do not agree that being married to someone famous makes someone notable, although in this case it probably tips the balance away from CSD eligibility. I am sending this to AFD instead. Stifle 12:00, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Fair play, but have you considered she was a journalist on a national newspaper. She has written a book. How much do you need? Steve block talk 12:03, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Garda de sus

No need to apply speedy delete on that. For Pete's sake, it's a subpage at my user where I gather material to read for the article I intend to create and I'll delete it when I'm finished with the article.Mind you, I even included the source for it in the draft. Dunemaire 15:18, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't know if you're aware, but you did put this article in the main namespace and not as a user subpage. And unfortunately, citing a source is not the same as getting permission for copyright. Stifle 15:20, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Now that you mention it, they appear as main pages, true. What do I have to change in their name to make them simple subpages at my user? Dunemaire 15:23, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

To create a subpage to your userpage, the best way is to create a link to it on your main user page then click the link. The page name must be of the form User:Dunemaire/new_page_name. An example is my User:Stifle/Irish_Railway_Project page. Stifle 15:24, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Great, I learned something new today. Thanks! Dunemaire 15:29, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

db g9

Hi, I saw you made the template, but the redirect you made doesn't work. It currently redirects from db-g9 not {{db-g9}} (ie. not in template namespace). There already is a {{db-g9}} for some reason, but the reason given in it currently contradicts the deletion policy. So if no one opposes that, you could just change it to redirect to your {{db-move}} - Bobet 13:41, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

toth

Why delete this page?-arguably the most famous piece of vadalism in the 20th century! Just because you havent heard of him doesnt make him important. This page has historic, artistic and australian historic importance. The world did exist before you 1980-even though you may find it hard to believe. I get tired of ignorant people. I dont know why I bother. Lentisco 00:45, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

And further more why dont remove all refernces on Misplaced Pages to Michelangelo? I mean hes just an old 15th century sculptor? What good is that to any one? And while youre at it remove all references to the Pieta statue? Its just some old dumb marble figure. Who could possibly care? Especially when we can go and watch a digitally configured King Kong. Now thats what I call art.Lentisco 00:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Afd

I removed it because it wasn't a legitimate Afd as it hadn't been logged, and nor had any reason been given and IMO the person who put it on 3 articles was trolling, one of which was drawn to my attention when someone else beat me to reverting it. Whatever it was not a legit Afd. My revert was made using a rollback, so it was automatically marked as minor by[REDACTED] not me. I am not quite sure what your point is? I also made the effort to leave a note on the editors talk page explaining the situation, so really you have nothing to censor me for, SqueakBox 03:53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Usually, when someone nominates a page for deletion and does not log it, Crypticbot or someone else adds it to the AFD page later that day. If a nomination has been made in bad faith, the AFD votes will usually have dominating keeps and it will often be changed to a speedy keep. In any case, I don't always agree today with what I wrote yesterday (or early this morning :)) and I would have been quite likely to do the same or a similar thing myself.

As for the minor edit issue, I was not aware of that Misplaced Pages feature and apologise for picking you up on it. Indeed my intention was not to censure you, simply to let you know that I slightly disagreed with you :) Stifle 11:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi. The basic reason that one cannot just leave an unlogged Afd is because (as far as I am aware) nobody would know it had been Afd'd (and some articles pass months unread). If the editor had given a reason for their Afd it would have been possible to log it myself but I could not log an Afd'd article without having a reason to see it up for deletion, SqueakBox 13:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Operation Wisła

Bravo Stifle, Operation Wisła is a Polish "Ulster" ? —the preceding unsigned comment is by 83.30.125.176 (talk • contribs) 14:23, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Um... what? Stifle 13:37, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Pankow (band)

Stifle, I don't know what your point was with your edit to Pankow (band). Ten minutes and twenty-eight seconds after the article was created, and one minute and forty-nine seconds after the first edit (adding, as the edit summary said, text translated from the German version), you added {{fact}} tags to the article, with the edit summary "Citations needed".

It's no great challenge to point out the deficiencies of a stub, especially not one that has existed for barely ten minutes. As a German-speaker, wouldn't your time be put to better use by helping me find supporting material and improving the article? Regards, ProhibitOnions 20:04, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Hans Wehr

I took off the deletion box which you had put on this. I don't know why you put it there. Hans Wehr is important for that dictionary.

User:Orange typewriter