User talk:Shaliya waya

Hello, Shaliya waya! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. We're so glad you're here! If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills, the sandbox is for you. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! — Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 13:31, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines
The community
Writing articles
Miscellaneous

Skirt article edit

Hi Shaliya waya, Thanks for editing Wikipedia. I hope you enjoy building the encyclopedia. You recently put back content I had deleted from the skirt article. I deleted the content because it did not meet our core policies. I've explained a little more on the article talk page. Please address these concerns before putting the content back. If you have any questions about this feel free to leave a message here or at the bottom of my talk page. You can find out more about contributing to our encyclopedia by visiting our welcome page. Happy editing! -- SiobhanHansa 15:22, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Cpsignal.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Cpsignal.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:10, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taser and Taser controversy articles

Hi, thanks for the message. I copied your message to Talk:Taser#Suggested merge with Taser controversy and will continue the discussion there. There is also an archived discussion at Talk:Taser controversy#Rename that has more background on "Electroshock weapon" vs "Taser". Flatscan 01:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

G'day. You might like to see my own discussion proposal. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 07:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjenks (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wal-Mart (disambiguation)

I've added an opinion of "rename" in the discussion which appears not to have been considered in the debate. I encourage you to review my reasoning at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wal-Mart (disambiguation) and determine if you need to reconsider your !vote. Regards. -- Whpq 18:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wal-Mart (disambiguation)

I have reverted your move back to Wal-Mart (disambiguation) again. While there was no consensus reached in the AfD vote, I am convinced that consensus was moving in the direction of moving the article to the List of Wal-Mart articles name, instead of deletion, which I am willing to compromise on. I am not sure why the admin in this case closed the discussion, when it is clear that there was still active discussion going on (I personally was getting ready to change my vote as it was). I still firmly believe that Wal-Mart needs no disambiguation page (based on the description of disambiguation pages). None of the items listed are going to ever be confused with Wal-Mart, but all are connected -- so the list naming is more appropriate here and the disambiguation page is completely inappropriate and unacceptable. I stand firm on this. Dr. Cash (talk) 16:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at WP:AFD, it is clearly stated that an article can be kept, but NOT renamed. Shaliya waya (talk) 17:49, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop this. The article needs no disambiguation, and it is completely and totally inappropriate. There is nothing on the AfD that says it cannot be renamed. I am also disputing the 'no consensus' that the closing admin put on it: the way I see it, there were 7 named users in favor of deletion, 3 named users (and 2 anons with less than 10 edits) in favor of keeping, 4 named users in favor of renaming, and 1 anon in favor of moving to Wal-Mart. So you don't have any consensus to keep this at a disambiguationn page, either. Dr. Cash (talk) 18:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Shaliya waya - walmart's flunkies have taken total control of the walmart article... there's no way for you to do anything to it that they won't just revert. Yet another of the ways WM screws with everyone. (How much you wanna bet they delete this post??)

My take on walmart customers

75.8.39.233 (talk) 19:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of The Security Age

An article that you have been involved in editing, The Security Age, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Security Age. Thank you. TerriersFan (talk) 23:33, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Wal-Mart (disambiguation)

A tag has been placed on Wal-Mart (disambiguation) 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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's 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. Dougie WII (talk) 16:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wal-Mart (Disambiguation)

Please stop re-creating this page and inserting it at Wal-Mart. The page does not meet the guidelines of being a disambiguation page per WP:DISAMBIG, and is nothing more than a list of 'see also' links. Per discussion at Talk:Wal-Mart, the 'see also' links were merged with Wal-Mart and placed in the 'see also' section of that page (by another user, as a matter of fact, not me). While I do recognize that no consensus for deletion was achieved at the WP:AfD for Wal-Mart (disambiguation), the reality of the situation is that very few (two named users and yourself and two anons with less than 10 edits each) actually wanted to keep it, and most either recommended deletion or moving the page to List of Wal-Mart articles, which is the compromise that I initially took. I then later decided that it was best to place the 'see also' list in the actual Wal-Mart article itself, which would increase the visibility of each of the articles in the list (you should be happy about this).

If you continue to place this cat-and-mouse game with this article without discussing your actions on the talk page or even leaving an edit summary, it will be considered vandalism and you will be banned. Dr. Cash (talk) 22:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that Derek.cashman has some valid points, and that you have some valid arguments as well. Instead of directly talking to one another you have both ignored each other. It think it would be best if both of you would talk about it at Talk:Wal-Mart#List of Wal-Mart articles before doing anything else (deleting Wal-Mart (disambiguation) or adding the disambig link at the top of the Wal-mart page). Thank you. (and welcome to wikipedia). Jon513 (talk) 00:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All through this process, there may be others who are for or against this article based on what they have read others wite about. At the same time, a single user, Derek Cashman, seems determined to kill a Wal-Mart disambiguation page out, perhaps out of a personal distaste for one. He just says he is firm and will not budge on it otherwise. Wikipedians are supposed to improve, NOT destroy Wikipedia. A Wikipedia page is only supposed to be deleted only if it is not notable or otherwise seriously inappropriate. The general practice is that when there is any doubt, the page is kept.Shaliya waya (talk) 01:48, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do not believe that Derek Cashman is interested in destroying Wikipedia. To say that anyone who doesn't think that there should be a disambiguation page is a vandal is not helpful. There are reasons to keep the page and reasons to delete it. What we need to do now is talk about it.
While pages are generally kept when there is 'no consensus' it does not mean that there is a consensus to kept. No consensus means that there is no consensus and more discussion has to take place. Pages can be moved or redirected or deleted if it will improve the encyclopedia by doing so; not only when they are 'not notable'.
Derek has explain his reasons for wanting the page to go at Talk:Wal-Mart#List of Wal-Mart articles. It would be appropriate for you to read what he says and respond. Please focus on reasons why you think the page adds to the quality of the encyclopedia, not on interpreting the AfD debate. Jon513 (talk) 10:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I feel that what Derek Cashman says about this page is propaganda for his own views, and is not allowing others to formulate their own ideas. I originally created this page because I found that our society has given "Wal-Mart" and "Walmart" other meanings beyond the name of the store, and indeed, there were Wikipedia articles on those meanings. The easiest way to find them would be via a disambiguation page after entering Wal-Mart and clicking on otheruses.Shaliya waya (talk) 15:39, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Derek has pointed out on the talk page that most of the content of the disambig page is integrated into the article and the rest are in the "see also". You have not responded to this. Jon513 (talk) 19:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Wal-Mart (disambiguation)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Wal-Mart (disambiguation), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wal-Mart (disambiguation) (2nd nomination). Thank you. Jon513 (talk) 14:36, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Walmart (disambiguation)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Walmart (disambiguation), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Wal-Mart (disambiguation). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 00:45, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Roach Motel (computing)

I have nominated Roach Motel (computing), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roach Motel (computing). 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. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:07, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Toni (slang)

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Toni (slang), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 20:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Toni (slang)

An editor has nominated Toni (slang), an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toni (slang) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 16:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July 2008

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to move Roach Motel by copying its content and pasting it into Roach Motel (product). This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is considered undesirable because it splits the page history which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other articles that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. --Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:54, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for uploading Image:Intown.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:11, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Intown.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sdrtirs (talk) 22:38, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry! I didn't the text in it. Now is fixed. I added the correspondent tag. Please take a look at it. Regards, Sdrtirs (talk) 18:12, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trust

Hallo, the article at Trust (social sciences) already covers the concept of trust in the way your new article seems to be doing, so I've reverted your edits to make it back to a redirect and will do a Requested Move to return to the previous situation. "Trust" is a word with "no primary usage", so the disambiguation page needs to be at Trust. PamD (talk) 07:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Wet paint sign

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Wet paint sign, 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. Ros0709 (talk) 17:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tragedy (event)

If you wish to contest the delete consensus of the WP:AFD I have no problem with you bringing this to deletion review if you want to. Cirt (talk) 00:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 October 5

Regarding your comment: The closing admin, most likely working fast through the whole thing, probably saw the overwhelming number of "deletes," and just said "the result was delete" with no further comment. -- This is not only incorrect and an assumption on your part - it is an inappropriate comment and not conducive to constructive dialogue in the deletion review. I respectfully request that you refactor your comment there. Thank you. Cirt (talk) 15:38, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent comments at the DRV are neither productive nor justified. Please remain civil and refrain from inferring negative motives just because things didn't go your way. If you continue in your current vein at the deletion review, it is likely to be speedy-closed by an admin and/or you are liable to be blocked for disruption. Stifle (talk) 08:16, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Racism

Wikipedia is not the place for people who want to be victims. Looking over your talk page, you are clearly here to simply for disruptive purposes. Nor do I believe you are black, as we tend to have more pride than that. Please find another venue for editing and cease suggesting anyone disagreeing with you is racist, because that's absolutely disgusting. -- Logical Premise Ergo? 16:28, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Jett Travolta

An article that you have been involved in editing, Jett Travolta, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jett Travolta. Thank you. WWGB (talk) 05:03, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Rude behavior

Category:Rude behavior, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Cgingold (talk) 13:06, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wal-Mart disambiguation at DR

Just letting you know that the discussion for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wal-Mart (disambiguation) (3rd nomination) has been listed for deletion review at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 July 15. You may be interested in commenting. Tatterfly (talk) 22:19, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Intown.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Intown.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. ZooFari 23:10, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Adopt

Template:Adopt has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 23:27, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adoption template

I fixed the view/discuss/edit links on Template:Adopt, and also added a bunch of articles that I found by looking at Category:WikiProject Adoption, fostering, orphan care and displacement articles. I think it is ready to be placed on articles, but take a look and let me know what you think. --RL0919 (talk) 03:41, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Roach Motel (insect trap)

Greetings! Since you have edited Roach Motel (insect trap), I thought you might want to comment on the discussion at Talk:Roach Motel (insect trap)#Appearances in popular media. Cheers! bd2412 T 22:00, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Black toilet seat phobia

The article Black toilet seat phobia has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Likely a hoax; no reliable sources to demonstrate any use whatsoever of this phrase by anyone, let alone notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:44, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Abuse

Template:Abuse has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. User:Woohookitty Disamming fool! 11:51, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse relisting

I am extremely shocked that User:Plastikspork has relisted ‎ Abuse. It has been a major nightmare for me having to waste my time on this - now the ordeal goes on for another week. I dont think User:Plastikspork looked at this properly, all those who wanted deletion have now withdrawn or moved to a neutral stance (User:Apoc2400 for example. There isnt any compromise to be reached as the view is now unanimously a Keep. There has been far too much discussion already. I am likely to have a heart attack at this rate.--Penbat (talk) 19:06, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The new discussion is here:

Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2010_January_24#Discussion_after_relisting

--Penbat (talk) 13:11, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse TFD looks like a complete mess

see User_talk:Plastikspork#Please_tell_where_i_have_voted_twice_in_the_new_discussion_.3F

It looks like administrators just count bits of emboldened text and ignore the fact that opinions may change as the result of discussion. 3 of the editors in the 1st TFD changed from delete to neutral but User:Plastikspork looks to have ignored that and just gone by their initial positions. If he had picked up their later views there would have been no justification for relisting the TFD and wasting everybodies time all over again.--Penbat (talk) 18:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do agree that this should be closed. There is no way this template could be deleted and yet everyone will be happy with the decision. Shaliya waya (talk) 16:19, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Bereavement flight

The article Bereavement flight has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is more of a dictionary definition, and there isn't a lot which can be expanded upon within an encyclopaedic context

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 22:36, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Pet naming

I have nominated Pet naming, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pet naming. 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. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 05:47, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect Shaliya waya, after looking at your talk page, perhaps you own vote on the RfA to keep your article might not carry much weight. If you need help in deciding what articles to create, don't hesitate to drop me a line on my talk page.--Kudpung (talk) 09:49, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Wet paint sign

I have nominated Wet paint sign, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wet paint sign (2nd nomination). 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. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 10:01, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits

Hi Shaliya waya! I've noticed that you are a keen creator of articles for our encyclopedia, but many of your articles get nominated for deletion. I've been bold and had a look at most of your articles and I'm wondering if we could find a way together of avoiding all these unpleasant AfD discussions. I would be happy to work with you to find a solution, but you could also help by going through your articles and bringing them up to standard before they too get listed for deletion. You could start for example by tweaking the references so that they display properly without all the naked URLs. As I mentioned before, please don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page foe any suggestions. --Kudpung (talk) 11:02, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering if you could take time out to read your talk page.--Kudpung (talk) 02:07, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for not getting back. I hope you understand I am a very busy woman. I work for the federal government. It may look like I do a lot of Wikipedia editing, but I am really doing it during spare time and on my days off. Shaliya waya (talk) 11:52, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation. I just thought that if you were to look occasionally at the relative high volume of controversy your edits generate, you might be able to adapt your efforts at editing and/or choice of creations in a way that might reduce the time other editors have to take discussing them. Please don't get me wrong - I'm here to help.--Kudpung (talk) 16:23, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Breitbarting listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Breitbarting. Since you had some involvement with the Breitbarting redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Uncle Dick (talk) 19:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Deborah Cox

Category:Deborah Cox, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 23:51, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Unpleasant odor

The article Unpleasant odor has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sasata (talk) 18:55, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

  • This permission does not give you any special status or authority
  • Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
  • You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
  • If, for any reason, you decide yo do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:27, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Casino security

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Casino security, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.casinomr.com.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 00:20, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting it found a Wikipedia copy! Good job on the article by the way, make sure you nominate it at WP:DYK,Sadads (talk) 02:55, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Tragedy (event) for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article Tragedy (event), which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tragedy (event) until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Bitmapped (talk) 04:38, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Phillip Greaves for deletion

The article Phillip Greaves is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phillip Greaves until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. NW (Talk) 22:05, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Following on...

Hi Shaliya. Next time you want to initiate discussion on how an administrator closes a deletion debate, I'd suggest that you start be talking with the actual administrator. The day before you took this to DRV, I'd already been discussing the close on my talk, I'd despite you feeling like I'm an "attacking wikilawyer" most people find me pretty reasonable. As I stated several times during the DRV (but that oddly no one took me up on?) I'd have been happy to restore the deleted material into userspace and assist in improving the article.
Aaron Brenneman (talk) 22:20, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Massacre for deletion

The article Massacre is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Massacre until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. -- PBS (talk) 07:56, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This edit is a copyright violation because you have not acknowledged in the edit history of the article Massacre that you copied content from another Wikipedia article, in this case List of events named massacres, (see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia). -- PBS (talk) 11:16, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See "Repairing insufficient attribution" in the same guideline on how to retroactively attribute the original copyright. -- PBS (talk) 11:24, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Monifah

Category:Monifah, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of massacres in Israel

The article List of massacres in Israel has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Single massacre is not a "list"; massacre took place one month before the establishment of the State of Israel; see List of killings and massacres before the 1948 Palestine war

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:58, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of massacres in Israel for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of massacres in Israel is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of massacres in Israel until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:56, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

British massacre

Hey! You are doing a good job of collating the massacre-scale crimes of Power. On the Mau Mau Uprising page, there's one of ours tucked away in the footnotes, the Chuka Massacre; see here for details. Rule, Britannia!
Iloveandrea (talk) 22:29, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of massacres: layout

It would be best if the tables wer automatically in chronological order. Otherwize, it's impossible for readers to sort the tables chronologically (unless we use YYYY/MM/DD format). Also, please remember that most countries don't use the US date format—for example, in the US it's January 1, 1900 but in the UK it's 1 January 1900.

I think we should follow the layout used on List of massacres in the United Kingdom or List of events named massacres.

What do you think? ~Asarlaí 19:41, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have been placing it in the American format, which I am accustomed to. I you wish to change it, I do not mind. Shaliya waya (talk) 19:58, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Višegrad massacres

Hello, I saw that you'd just added links in the Sjeverin massacre and Višegrad massacres. There are enough complications already in dealing with articles on massacres in the Bosnian war, notably the Srebrenica massacre/genocide, for me not to want to get involved in a wider project but if there is any information you particularly want to discuss please feel free to contact me. This is the anniversary period for the Višegrad massacres (anniversary period for many of the terrible things that happened in Bosnia in 1992 but in Višegrad it was a concentrated sequence of terrible events) - Pionirska Street happened on the 14th and Bikavac on the 27th. If you're interested in finding out more about Višegrad and Sjeverin, the Visegrad Genocide Memories blog[1] is a trustworthy source of background information. Opbeith (talk) 08:39, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have been spending the past several weeks trying to create lists of massacres for each country, which is a huge job. I have been doing this because there is already a page called List of events named massacres that indiscriminately lists massacres. This list is very incomplete and it lists only a few hundred massacres. It appears there have been thousands of massacres throughout world history, and it is not practical to list them all on a single page. This is not a good page to keep in the future.
One problem that I have faced is that over time, many countries have merged, split, changed names, or changed boundaries. This leaves a question as to what list certain massacres belong in. At the moment, I have been trying in most cases, with exceptions, to place each massacre in the list in the country where the present location is. But it does not have to remain that way. If someone feels there is a better way to organize this or make these placements, this can always be discussed. I am open to any such ideas. Shaliya waya (talk) 00:24, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Massacre series

I am glad to see someone else also is interested in this issue. Thanks Kanatonian (talk) 21:52, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For your effort is making the massacre series articles better. Kanatonian (talk) 21:53, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of massacres in the United Kingdom

Hi I have reverted you last edits to List of massacres in the United Kingdom see the talk page. Jim Sweeney (talk) 23:09, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Shaliya waya! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only. 
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:14, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of massacres in the Czech Republic

The article List of massacres in the Czech Republic has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Category:Invitation

Category:Invitation, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 21:28, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Samanta Institute of Science and Technology for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Samanta Institute of Science and Technology is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samanta Institute of Science and Technology until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 05:28, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Massacre

The article Massacre has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Moving this to Wiktionary. Requesting delete

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Alin0Steglinski (talk) 12:16, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of massacres in Uzbekistan

The article List of massacres in Uzbekistan has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

There's only one entry in this list; this article can just be a redirect to that page.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Shrigley (talk) 16:13, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing articles

Hi. I've mentioned this several times previously but it appears that you are still not aware of the requirement to reference articles, in particular at Posthumous trial , a recent creation, and Parcopresis. Please follow the links on the welcome message to various help pages and provide references. Thanks.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:59, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware of referencing and I am generally a good referencer. I got side-tracked when creating this article and never got to do that. Whenever I have free time next, I plan to get to that and add more to the article as well. Shaliya waya (talk) 01:58, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jordan Kitts Music for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jordan Kitts Music is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jordan Kitts Music until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dew Kane (talk • contribs) 21:25, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Flower girl

Regarding the redirect of flower girl (disambiguation) to flower girl I am wondering if we should reconsider perhaps changing the main article into a disambig. The term also refers to an occupation of girls who sell flowers. This is depicted in Eliza Doolittle's character from My Fair Lady and Pygmalion (play), and is seen repeatedly throughout historical fictions such as Emma (manga). Since it's small maybe we can just describe both meanings on the same page rather than splitting? Ranze (talk) 23:35, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Denial of request

The article Denial of request has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Nomination of List of massacres in Guinea for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of massacres in Guinea is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of massacres in Guinea until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. The Banner talk 00:01, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of massacres in Iceland for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of massacres in Iceland is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of massacres in Iceland until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. The Banner talk 00:09, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of La Petite Academy

The article La Petite Academy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back. Thank you,

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:16, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of La Petite Academy

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 La Petite Academy, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

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. DGG ( talk ) 05:33, 2 November 2015 (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) 13:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know

You have been mentioned at Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians. Ottawahitech (talk) 22:45, 3 January 2016 (UTC)please ping me[reply]

Proposed deletion of Runt

The article Runt has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

this is not a dictionary.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. That man from Nantucket (talk) 13:06, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Repub listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Repub. Since you had some involvement with the Repub redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 00:36, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of massacres in North Korea for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of massacres in North Korea is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of massacres in North Korea until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 10:07, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Gambling terminology

Template:Gambling terminology has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 14:26, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of Wal-Mart articles listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of Wal-Mart articles. Since you had some involvement with the List of Wal-Mart articles redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 06:11, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Cpsignal.jpg

Notice

The file File:Cpsignal.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned image with no foreseeable encyclopedic use.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Pkbwcgs (talk) 08:29, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Drug raid" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Drug raid. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 18#Drug raid until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 22:58, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Songs in memory of deceased persons has been nominated for renaming

Category:Songs in memory of deceased persons has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 16:39, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Songs in memory of deceased persons

A tag has been placed on Category:Songs in memory of deceased persons indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:31, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Employee abuse" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Employee abuse has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 23 § Employee abuse until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 20:06, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Permission slip for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Permission slip is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Permission slip until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Boleyn (talk) 16:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]