User talk:Pernoctator

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Pernoctator, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Aboutmovies (talk) 05:55, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Kullal Chickappu Naik, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Indian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:36, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Alupas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Capital (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:39, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More work needed on your new source reference

Hi Pernoctator, I want to first express my appreciation for your large number of edits on Wikipedia (WP). Second, on behalf of WP readers, I must regretfully ask you to do more work on 2 of your edits, as follows:

At the end of the introduction to both of 2 articles Aliyasantana and Marumakkathayam, you added the sentence "The Madras Aliyasantana (Karnataka Amendment) Act, 1961 governs this practice as per Indian law." So I went to that new source reference of yours (a copy of this 1961 Act), hoping to learn more about the practice (of a matrilineal system of inheritance, described in both articles). But instead, your source reference not only does not govern the practice but instead states that a person's property "shall devolve by testamentary or intestate succession under" an earlier (1956) Act "and not according to the Aliyasantana law." Simply stated, your source reference governs the non-practice of the Aliyasantana law.

Your sentence got my hopes up, and then I learned the exact opposite of what your sentence claimed I would learn, a bad experience that I'm sure you did not really wish WP readers to have. I suppose you were not aware of what your source reference actually says.

(By the way, if you do understand this matrilineal system of inheritance, you could correct errors in both articles which have been there for at least 4 years already and which would take me forever to learn enough to try to fix by myself. That would really help me and other WP readers!)

So, please do fix your problem at your earliest convenience, on behalf of all WP readers, perhaps by correctly re-wording your sentence, or by simply deleting it. Then please do notify me thereof, at this identical entry on either your talk page or mine. Thanks much. Gratefully, your co-worker on WP, For7thGen (talk) 23:52, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Travancore royal family (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Vijayanagar, Chera and Rani

Chowta (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to British

Cochin royal family (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to William Logan

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:21, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TUSC token 9e61d2fb10e9c2b4abcd8f57d6bdc3ca

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Abbakka Chowta, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rani (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Images at Nadar (caste)

Do you have a policy/guideline link to support your edit summary here ? I'm not saying that you are incorrect but I've never come across this one before. - Sitush (talk) 15:01, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ask moonriddengirl for the exact link.i have seen some edit summaries of some experience editors who have removed fair use images from infoboxes.the idea of fair use is limited use.since it is a copyrighted image unless the owner releases it for use unconditionally on wikipedia while keeping the copyright.i don't know i might be wrong with fair use thingy.it is tricky.Pernoctator (talk) 15:07, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. In fact, I'll point her to this thread so that it is all in one place. You seem to know your way around this place for someone with well under 1000 edits! - Sitush (talk) 15:23, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's no rule explicitly banning non-free images in infoboxes, but that edit was correct. Basically, free images could (and do) exist of Nadar people, and so any non-free image used in the infobox would fail the first non-free content criterion. J Milburn (talk) 15:47, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. So, theoretically, if we only had one image and that one was non-free then we could use it there? - Sitush (talk) 15:55, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No. The requirement is that the image is in no way replaceable. If we happened to not have any pictures of (say) Manx people, we would have to go without illustration, as we could theoretically create a free image by finding someone who is Manx and taking a picture of them. I suppose, in theory, if we were dealing with a race which is now considered extinct for some reason and we had no free images of people from said race, we may be able to justify the use of a non-free image, provided it met the other non-free content criteria. (Note that, unless the race was known to have particular prominent features, the image would perhaps end up being challenged on NFCC#8 grounds.) It's going to be rare that non-free images are justified in articles of this sort. J Milburn (talk) 16:21, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You see, this is why I have never liked images of people in caste infoboxes unless they're really old. Modern stuff is just too messy (not to mention issues of undue weight, choosing the glamorous faces etc as part of the caste glorification process). I'd happily see a guideline that prevent them completely! Thanks for your help. - Sitush (talk) 16:39, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Religion in ancient Tamil country

Hello,

Thank you for editing Christianity out. I presumed that since I linked the main articles i.e. Christianity in Tamil Nadu -Christianity in Kerala people would go there for citations. I will undo your removal and add citations. Thank you for bringing it up.

--Avedeus (talk) 15:13, 30 January 2012 (UTC) Hi,[reply]

I saw your comment. Yes they are in Tamil. But it is a belief - a legend. The point is that people "believe" (i.e. we are not looking for proof) that St Thomas introduced Christianity in 52 AD and died at Mylapore - St Thomas mount. . Also, I got an English book to cite for the the inclusion of Essani's in Manimekalai.

--Avedeus (talk) 17:21, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

see even for the belief(i haven't removed that) add better sources(i am sure you can find plenty of scholarly sources) and don't try to potray it as though it is true.also please use reliable sources not church affiliated.Pernoctator (talk) 18:06, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

M. Vijayan

While reverting my edit to remove M. Vijayan, from the List of Nambudiris, your edit summary reads "fails wp bio and wp list also no verification for nambudiri status". The subject is a recipient of Bhatnagar Prize for 1985 in Biological Sciences and is a Padma Shri (2004), India's third highest civilian honor. How could then you say fails BP:BIO? If you simply say Nambudiri status unverified, I can understand that. Salih (talk) 16:55, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

please create an article if he is notable.don't add random people's name.just because they have won some award.also nambudiri status is not verified hence removed.i think it is pretty much acccepted convention that only people with wiki article can be listed.otherwise every other person can ad his nme to the list.Pernoctator (talk)

Hey, you can't ask the other editors to create an article to show the notability. And, don't try to belittle the award like Padma Sri. Please be more sensible. Salih (talk) 17:42, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ok there was a article with his name.sorry for error in edit summary.but problem persists nambudiri status not verified.Pernoctator (talk) 17:04, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed that the nambudiri status is not explicitly verified. Salih (talk) 17:42, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So what do I do?

If I can not place pictures on Wikipedia, where do I get them from to upload? And I'm extremely sorry, I better check rules once again. Very sorry! I feel sheepish... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajayupai95 (talk • contribs) 16:03, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 08:21, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gommateshwara Etymology

I did not place the etymology of Gommateshwara on that page. But I had no issues with anyone else mentioning that because that person had cited a source. The inscription at the base of the statue is in Konkani (check Konkani#Early_Konkani) though some have argued in favor of Marathi. And the Rashtrakutas ruled that entire region at one point but yes, the statue was erected by a Ganga general. The name Gommateshwara is not for that statue, it is for that monk. That monk was not native to Karnataka, and so the name Gommateshwara need not be related to the Gangas or any other dynasty. The person who had mentioned that etymology, cited a source. If you feel that the source is incorrect, you need to cite another source verifying otherwise. Else, a source cannot be disregarded just because it feels weird to someone.

And about the Jainism template, yes it is not the best looking template, I'll work on that. And the purpose of adding it to Jainism related articles was to give the readers options for navigation as such small articles rarely have navigable options. It also gives them a nice standardized look, otherwise they feel empty. However, there are articles which need not have the template but can instead have the Jainism topics navbar, I'll work on that as well.--Aayush18 (talk) 16:21, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

can you provide me with the exact text on what the source says ?.Pernoctator (talk) 16:28, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I could, I did not cite that source and I don't have that book with me. It seems that User:Nijgoykar cited that source. He/she would be able to help you out. If after that, you feel that the source doesn't quite address the etymology, you may remove it from the Bahubali page.--Aayush18 (talk) 17:03, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i read the source on g books.no mention of rashtrakutas.it is unsatisfactory.therfore i asked you to find multiple sources not one in the edit summary.etymology is a very tricky business on wikipedia.Pernoctator (talk) 17:36, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok cool--Aayush18 (talk) 20:06, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

February 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the content and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Thank you. RicardoKlement (talk) 12:28, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Warring reported to ANI

You've been reported at ANI for Edit Warring here RicardoKlement (talk) 12:43, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, you have been reported at WP:EW, not ANI. I note that you have responded there. Since I think you know the drill and you are participating in the discussion about this issue on my talk page, I think that you had better take this note as a formal warning re: WP:3RR/WP:Edit warring, with all the usual palaver about how it can lead to you being blocked. You really should have engaged in a civil discussion and provided a link to the RfC when asked. - Sitush (talk) 13:13, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

okies.Pernoctator (talk) 13:15, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would ask that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on Konkani Brahmins. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Joyson Prabhu^Holla at me! 14:37, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

assuming good faith.do read your comments on the talk page.making you own definitions of who are brahmins and who are not.and i don't trust anyone who uses gyan as a source.lol Pernoctator (talk) 14:40, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I used it when the consensus against using it had not been reached! You know what, i am just about fed up with your dumb irritating behaviour! You don't even have the sense to frame a grammatically proper sentence and lack the basic sense of judgement. Even the other fellow at Talk:Salman Khan said he had no idea what your problem is! And you want to contribute to Wikipedia! LOL. Joyson Prabhu^Holla at me! 14:45, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pernoctator, you're edit warring on Konkani Brahmins too, now. Please stop reverting and start discussing on the article's talk page or I'll have to block you. Salvio ^Let's talk about it! 14:47, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Salvio! This fellow is driving me mad over here. Joyson Prabhu^Holla at me! 14:49, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do agree. Any controversial edits require a discussion... or at the very least a link to where a discussion has already taken place. RicardoKlement (talk) 14:50, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i have not crossed the line here.i have already removed some of the bogus sources this person has been using to glorify his own caste.am sure you must be aware of indian caste warriors.also this person is not even being civil.Pernoctator (talk) 14:52, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

3-rr is not an entitlement, as you can be edit warring even if you do not technically breach the three-revert rule. Please, when you're in a content dispute, try to follow WP:DR. Edit warring doesn't help and will only get you blocked... Salvio ^Let's talk about it! 14:56, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RfC

I did suggest to you a few days ago that you hang off implementing the RfC. Instead of doing so, you seem to be going on a spree in the opposite direction and you are getting yourself into hot water. You neither have to experience nor the skills to deal with any fall-out, so I now strongly suggest that you stop for now. Please note also that the potential for objections causing a revised RfC - which I did sort-of mention to you - has now happened. I am likely to be involved in drafting it, along with some other folks. - Sitush (talk) 15:17, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ok.stopping it for now.Pernoctator (talk) 15:20, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. No offence was intended, but the potential for widespread problems/disruption/warring related to that RfC is considerable and I think that you have enough controversies to deal with right now. Good luck in resolving those! And discuss for as long as it takes: discussing but also editing the content under discussion is not usually a solution. - Sitush (talk) 15:26, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i did not expect indian caste warriors to react in any different way.but it was fun considering i have heard a really funny definition of who is a brahmin.listen to it. there is erm a secular definition to a brahmin and a religious definition to it.whatever that means.rofl. Pernoctator (talk) 15:31, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you had any sense at all, you would be better off laughing at yourself! Anyone who has read the Talk:Konkani_Brahmins would probably think that you are a fool, if they hadn't already read your edit summaries. lol. Joyson Prabhu^Holla at me! 15:38, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) That is a common argument and it does have academic support. You are going to have to live with it, just as you have to live with the notion of Muslim Rajputs etc despite caste in India supposedly being a Hindu construct. India-related articles frequently give rise to heated discussion etc and I can see a time not too long off when all the India-related caste/community/religion etc ones may end up with a one-revert rule. The more correct approach in that instance was to ask for citations: tag it, leave a note on the talk page if necessary, and watch it. If the content is still not reliably sourced in, say, six months' time then feel free to delete. (The length of time depends on a lot of factors that experience alone can teach you, but in this instance I would certainly allow three months).

You will get the hang of all this but you really need to tone down the disparaging remarks. - Sitush (talk) 15:41, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You, too, Joyson. - Sitush (talk) 15:41, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, my dear friend! Joyson Prabhu^Holla at me! 15:42, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sitush the actual problem is that on wikipedia claims are potrayed as facts by caste warriors citing bogus caste sponsored sources. even dalits like pallars claim to be descendants of chola pandya kings.the amount of rubbish thats on indian ethnic articles is monumental.but as mark tully once said India is a chaos sigh.Pernoctator (talk) 15:55, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

will take your advice though.Pernoctator (talk) 16:08, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do. And please, would you be willing to strike the various claims that other editors are "caste warriors"? Other editors are taking offense and this is making collegial editing much harder to achieve. Salvio ^Let's talk about it! 16:26, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i am stating the truth.ask any person who has even dared to edit indian caste articles.all sorts of abuse are showered at them.and look the term caste warrior is not a abuse.i won't use it if you say so ,but seriously i have been called worse.Pernoctator (talk) 16:30, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know and, if you check, I have blocked for a day the editor who personally attacked you; considering the topic area is somewhat sensitive – I'm familiar with it –, please try to avoid all inflammatory remarks as "caste warrior". They can only lead to more drama... Salvio ^Let's talk about it! 16:35, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

well thats news to me.just saw the block.i was busy with something else.agree with drama part.but just a suggestion we seriosuly need to do something about the junk i.e. indian ethnic group articles.there are all sorts of claims made about being brahmin,kshatriya royals and what not.Pernoctator (talk) 16:41, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are ways to deal with it. The bull in a china shop approach is not one of them. - Sitush (talk) 16:47, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kadia Kshatriya

I have noted that you redirected the page Kadia Kshatriyas - to Kadia twice. However, on talk page you have not given any verifiable citation for doing so :-- Please go to link : (1) [1] Encyclopaedia of backward castes, Volume 2 By M. L. Mathur and (2) [2] Land and people of Indian states and union territories: in 36 volumes. Gujarat By S. C. Bhatt, Gopal K. Bhargava. Both mention KADIA KSHATRIYAS/ GURJAR KSHARTRIYAS as a separate Backward Class. Here is another link for Gurjar Kshatriyas [3] Among the Kadia (community) - there are three major groups 1. Kadia Kumbhar, 2. Kadia Kshatriyas and Kadia (Muslim). All these three castes have separate pages, so you cannot just cancel one page as per your whim. Please note that the citations of above books are given in article. One cannot simply re-direct a page. First create a consensus for a redirect.

Also please note that Kshatriya is not a peacock term. Gujarat Government has accepted Kadia Kshatriya / Gurjar Kshatriya as a separate caste, as per books ref given above

Also on talk page of Kadia you have commented kadias are not kshatriya.stop using such terms for caste glorification.there are various backward subcastes only.kadia is the generic name of the caste . Please note the Kadia Kshatriya - article is linked with citation from above books. Also I have explained that there are three sub-groups as above.

Please do not revert or redirect again before creating a consensus by discussing it on talk page of article - giving verifiable sources that the Kadias are not Kshatriyas. Un-till and unless there are verifiable source wikipedia cannot accept your explanation. Jethwarp (talk) 06:11, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

can you give me sources that gujarat government lists them separately.look some of the sources you have used on the page are not very reliable.also pov problems .Pernoctator (talk) 10:19, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Pernoctator. You have new messages at Wifione's talk page.
Message added 20:27, 5 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Wifione ^Message 20:27, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Pernoctator. You have new messages at Wifione's talk page.
Message added 14:15, 6 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Wifione ^Message 14:15, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of people from

It is poor practice to remove the content from a list of People from [wherever] on the basis of no sources being present, when the connection with the place is obvious from the Wikipedia article on them--if you insist on having it, whatever was the source for the main bio facts can be copied over. If there are specific individuals whose association you disagree with on the basis of those articles, discuss on that article's talk page. If there are red links, of course remove them--unless the person is obviously worth an article, like a King.

It is particularly poor practice to remove all the content from a list and then nominate it for deletion as empty.

I have restored what I think restorable and removed the deletion tags. If you would like to contest it, the best method would be to bring one such article to AfD for a community decision. Depending on the result, then bring the others. Bringing them all at once may prove unnecessary work, and bringing too many articles of the same nature to AfD at the same time is not the most favored practice. Of course, the very best practice, since you seem to know the geographic area , would be to find or copy the sources. DGG ( talk ) 19:55, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Caste/community lists

I have opened a discussion here. You are mentioned in it. Best. - Sitush (talk) 12:45, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What should we do ?.let people add all sorts of unsourced nonsense regarding caste religion etc.Pernoctator (talk) 08:32, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we're definitely ok to remove unsourced people who are still living. I am still trying to get some strong consensus one way or another re: the dead. - Sitush (talk) 09:13, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny Lever's Faith

Since the article was created on 30th November, 2006, the person has been designated within the category of both Indian Protestants as well as Indian Christians and since your ignorant deletion of the category by you, I have provided enough source material to prove the existence of the Person's personal religious life. Your fundamentalist thinking and personal grudges would be better off wikipedia articles, rather than attacking and destroying certain information on the article. Kindly do not indulge or exhibit your personal grudges on the wikipedia. Thanking You --Johnmylove (talk) 16:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

eh?.Pernoctator (talk) 08:29, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:24, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of J. V. Shetty

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on J. V. Shetty, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. PageImp (talk) 09:46, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of J. V. Shetty

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on J. V. Shetty requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. 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 this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. PageImp (talk) 18:44, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]