User talk:Amists

 AfD • CfD • TfD • CSD • RfA • AN/I • 3RR • MoS • FAC • VP • AWNB • NEW • Signpost • Purge

Please reconsider
Dear Amists, Please reconsider your neutral vote at Third holiest site in Islam. See according to OIC and Muslim text it is indeed third holiest site. I wish if you could read comments posted by User:Almaqdisi and User:thestick. Furthermore read User:TerryJ-Ho are not Muslim but he still understand the basic proble. Do not you think that they are convincing enough comments? Please reconsider. best regards --- ابراهيم 15:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. Thank you for considering. -- ابراهيم 15:44, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Duun
Sorry, but I don't read Norwegian and the original article made no assertion of his importance in Norwegian literature. Remember, the speedy criteria A7 is that the article makes no assertion of notability and the original article feel into that. It was rarely edited and almost every edit was to vandalize or repair vandalization. --Habap 15:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: (WP:HD) Signature
How to fix your signature may be helpful; if that doesn't help, copy-and-paste the code you're trying to use and also place your signature on User talk:ais523, and I'll try to fix it for you. --ais523 14:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This is my first try: Amists  talk •  contribs

Amists talk •  contribs
 * Make sure 'raw signature' is on, then copy-and-paste the above line into the sig box at Special:Preferences and let me know if it works or if there are any tweaks you'd like. (It's possible I've missed something and the sig will be rejected; if so let me know what the error message is.) --ais523 14:31, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * BTW, the timestamp's appended to the sig automatically (if you want it incorporated into the sig, it's a lot more complicated and can confuse bots), and the 'talk' above appears bold because this is your talk page (it won't appear bold on other pages). --ais523 14:32, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure you've copied-and-pasted the sig correctly? It worked for me when I used it. Try copying-and-pasting from the edit box in case there's a problem with doing it from the page. --ais523 14:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

AfD
Remember to use the "preloaded debate" when creating AfD pages, it helps the users see what they need to know and it helps admins clean up afterwards. Thanks for helping Wikipedia! yandman 10:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello, you pasted the information on the wrong AfD - Articles for deletion/Ethnic politics of Khuzestan. Khorshid 10:37, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Your user sandbox
Hi there!

I'm coming from the question you asked on the Help desk. The way I see it, there should be no reason why you can't have a user sandbox, or any other user subpage (a page calles ) for your work on Wikipedia. Many users use them, to store to-do lists, templates, unfinished versions of pages etc. I don't know what happened to your user sandbox, but as long as you're using it in relation to your work on Wikipedia (and not, for instance, as a free web host - something you certainly don't seem to be doing!), then there should be no reason why you can't have one!

I hope that helps! &mdash; QuantumEleven 13:50, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I've restored your sandbox. You placed a db tag on the page, which qualified it for speedy deletion. I did not realise that you were just experimenting. If you want to place a template on a page without having the template transclued into it,, which in your case would be  , which shows up as . Once again, sorry for the mix-up. Cheers!--thunderboltz(Deepu)  05:46, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Reply from MartinDK
Thanks! And I return the compliments. But really the ones that end up at AfD are not the worst.

Here is a good one I am about to report:

List_of_two-letter_English_words

This appears to be listcruft for Scrabble fans! Bet you thought you would never hear those words together! You know... some of these AfD's just write themselves...

Cheers, MartinDK 16:05, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Reconsider vote for Dr.S. Hussain Zaheer Memorial High School
I would like to ask you to reconsider your creation of the AfD for Dr.S. Hussain Zaheer Memorial High School. With a little bit of research, it is clear that the school is indeed notable, and the additional information has been added to the article with material from the school's web site and several references from The Hindu, India's main national newspaper. With its management and operation by the Indian Institute of Chemical Technology, the school has a unique science program that allows students to learn from India's top scientists, and to have heard from several recent Nobel Prize in Chemistry laureates. The school competes in, and has won, at the top levels of sport in the state. I strongly suggest that all those who previously voted to Delete should re-read the article and reconsider their vote. Alansohn 16:07, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: (WP:HD) Your contribs
There doesn't seem anything obviously wrong with your contribs to me. If contributions that you think you made aren't showing up, the most likely reason is that the page you made them on was deleted, and the second most likely reason is that someone else made the same edit at the same time, so the edit-conflict merger discarded your edit to prevent it being made twice. If your contribs appear on the wrong pages, it's possible the pages have been moved. If this doesn't solve it, let me know what the exact problem is. --ais523 17:10, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Reply to your comments
While I'm not an administrator here, your comments are quite appreciated! Thanks. Seraphimblade 13:42, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * It isn't allowed for the author of an article to remove a speedy deletion tag (though generally another editor may, especially if they provide a good-faith reason). If the author does so, warn h(im|er) on the user talk page, starting with, and continuing with , , and  . If the user continues to remove the speedy tag after the final warning, it should be reported as obvious vandalism. Seraphimblade 13:51, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh-to add to the last. If the author did more editing besides removing the speedy tag, it's generally good to simply put the tag back if the article still meets a speedy criteria. (If the author obviously improved the article to the point it no longer meets a speedy criterion, it's really not worth fighting them over, even if they technically broke a rule removing it.) If they only removed the speedy tag, you may revert the article as many times as needed-removal of the tag by an article's author is considered vandalism and therefore not subject to the three revert rule. However, once it becomes apparent the author doesn't intend to stop and the final warning's been given, just report it on the vandal board-an admin will review the article at that point anyway. Seraphimblade 13:57, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Russell Dennett
I think I've cleaned this up enough now that it no longer merits a speedy (full disclosure: while I didn't create the article, I do have a huge weakness for this era of UK pop music.) If you still question the notability of the subject (and I agree, he's hardly the most notable member of the band, and some of the stuff I left in isn't that impressive so far as credentials go) do you want to send it to Afd? I think he might satisfy WP:MUSIC though, as he was on some of the bigger albums. Either way, would you consider removing the speedy tag? Cheers. Dina 14:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I think I like the urgency of "saving" articles -- "Dina you must edit like you've never edited before to save this article". It fights my natural laziness. ;) Dina 15:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)