User talk:Ashershow1/2011 Archive


 * The following discussions are archived. Please do not edit them.  If you have any additional comments, please notify Ashershow1 at his active talk page, and he will consider reactivating the discussion.

Random Smiley Award
For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award. (Explanation and Disclaimer) ♠  TomasBat   01:40, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Ring 3D-theatrical release poster.tiff
 Thanks for uploading File:The Ring 3D-theatrical release poster.tiff. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Armbrust Talk  Contribs  15:57, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why the file page claims it is an orphaned image, because it clearly appears in the infobox of The Ring 3D. Seems like a perfectly reasonable fair use image.--Ashershow1talk 18:31, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:The Ring 3D-theatrical release poster.tiff


A tag has been placed on File:The Ring 3D-theatrical release poster.tiff requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Phearson (talk) 21:02, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:The Ring 3D-theatrical release poster.tiff
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:The Ring 3D-theatrical release poster.tiff, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Phearson (talk) 21:06, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Insanity (Home exercise program)


A tag has been placed on Insanity (Home exercise program) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  at the top of the article, immediately below the speedy deletion  tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate), and providing your reasons for contesting on the article's talk page, 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. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

You may want to read the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. ThePaintedOne (talk) 08:08, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I had replied on the talk page, but it got nuked a couple of seconds later. Two of the sources you put up were unsuitable as they were primary sources to websites owned by the company. The third was a reasonable secondary source, but just being reviewed by a fitness website does not demonstrate notabillity, which I imagine is why the reviewing admin has deleted it. The reason it was tagged for SD is because this is a duplicate of another article already speedied last night as promotional and didnt have any evidence showing this was a notable product. If you really want to put this page up I'd suggest building it in userspace first, with the emphasis on finding good quality secondary sources which show its a notable product, then copy to wikispace (possibly asking for an opinion from someone else first)--ThePaintedOne (talk) 14:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes it seems this article was deleted rather quickly; discussion was still unresolved. The review I listed was only one of dozens of reviews online of Insanity (I'll be glad to list more of them), and those blogs and reviews combined with official company websites makes Insanity just as notable as any standard WP product article.  I'm working on getting the article re-posted so we can continue discussion at its talk page.--Ashershow1talk • contribs 14:53, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Beachbody Inc.


A tag has been placed on Beachbody Inc. requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  at the top of the article, immediately below the speedy deletion  tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate), and providing your reasons for contesting on the article's talk page, 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. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

You may want to read the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. ThePaintedOne (talk) 08:35, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Jason Pooley
Hi. What would you like wikified? It looks reasonably wikified already. --Dweller (talk) 12:42, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The article seems to give four random sentences about Pooley, thus my tag, nevertheless I have reluctantly removed it due to the fact that Jason Pooley is a relatively good stub. --Ashershow1talk • contribs 21:44, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reverting. Your initial tagging made me wonder if you misunderstand the wikify tag and your reply emphasises the problem. If you take a quick look at Wikify it should help. An appropriate tag for Pooley's article might have been . Cheers. --Dweller (talk) 15:37, 9 February 2011 (UTC)