User talk:Bravo Plantation

RfD nomination of Batsy
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!)  15:55, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 80s Classic


The article 80s Classic has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * unsourced list of films. No indication of how the films qualify for the list other than they were released in the 1980s. WP:Original research

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  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  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. noq (talk) 12:23, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Bravo Plantation! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 22:55, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Gary Goddard -

Speedy deletion nomination of Aunt Grace
A tag has been placed on Aunt Grace requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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), 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. A More Perfect Onion (talk) 21:49, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I offer my condolences for your loss. Nevertheless, Wikipedia is not a place for memorial pages. --A More Perfect Onion (talk) 21:51, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
A More Perfect Onion (talk) 14:58, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

WHere is my message?

Speedy deletion nomination of Aunt Grace


A tag has been placed on Aunt Grace requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Best regards,  Cind.   amuse  (Cindy) 10:56, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Packet Corned Beef


A tag has been placed on Packet Corned Beef, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising,. Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit |the article's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Begonia brandbygeana (talk) 14:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Removing Speedy at Packet Corned Beef
Hi Bravo Plantation, you recently removed a deletion tag from Packet Corned Beef. Because Wikipedia policy does not allow the creator of the page to remove speedy deletion tags, an automated program has replaced the tag. Although the deletion proposal may be incorrect, removing the tag is not the correct way for you to contest the deletion, even if you are more experienced than the nominator. Instead, please use the talk page to explain why the page should not be deleted. Remember to be patient, there is no harm in waiting for another experienced user to review the deletion and judge what the right course of action is. As you are involved, and therefore potentially biased, you should refrain from doing this yourself. Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 14:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Begonia brandbygeana (talk) 14:58, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Packet Corned Beef


The article Packet Corned Beef has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No reliable evidence confirming that this product is particularly notable/popular in the UK markets. No need for a stand alone article, the topic is covered at Corned_beef.

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 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 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. Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 15:43, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Packet Corned Beef
Bravo, you wrote that "Packet Corned Beef is an extremely popular food-stuff in England". Could you cite any reliable sources, please? The content of Wikipedia must be backed by reliable sources. Also, is it packet or packed beef? --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 15:48, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

It is 'Packet' as it is sold in packets. Bravo Plantation (talk) 15:51, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, thanks. I see, the packet is important here. But wait please. A lot of things are sold in packets. Do you think we should maintain separate articles for all the products, purely due to the fact that they are sold in packets? Do you think we should have separate articles for potatoes packed in cartons, potatoes packed in polyethene bags, potatoes packed in mesh bags etc etc? Sorry, but it would be in my opinion ridiculous. --Vejvančický Well, not in my opinion(talk | contribs) 16:08, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Er.... this is about corned beef, not potatos. Please stay on topic. Thanks. Bravo Plantation (talk) 16:14, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I believe you understand what I'm talking about. Bravo, please stop with your disruptive editing, you are just wasting the time of editors working hardly on this project. Could you respond to the objections in a constructive way, please? --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 16:29, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Please don't assume that everyone is on your wavelength when it comes to certain matters. Stop being sarcastic. Bravo Plantation (talk) 16:30, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of 80s Classic for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 80s Classic 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 Articles for deletion/80s Classic 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. Dennis Brown (talk) 16:10, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Your contributed article, 90s Classic


Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, 90s Classic. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as yourself. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - 1990s in film. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at 1990s in film - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 16:17, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Your contributed article, 00s Classic


Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, 00s Classic. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as yourself. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - 2000s in film. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at 2000s in film - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 16:28, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Packet Corned Beef for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Packet Corned Beef 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 Articles for deletion/Packet Corned Beef 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. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 16:36, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

What an utter disgrace. How dare you. Bravo Plantation (talk) 16:39, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

February 2012
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at User:Dennis Brown. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ''The proper venue for resolution of an issue you have with another user is WP:DRV. '' &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 17:01, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Packet Corned Beef. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 17:03, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that wasn't the right thing to do, but I feel as though Dennis Brown is bullying me. Bravo Plantation (talk) 17:04, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ignore the link I provided above. Dispute resolution is the place to go, not deletion review, which is where the WP:DRV shortcut takes you. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 17:05, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks KuyaBriBri Bravo Plantation (talk) 17:06, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Please could you provide a link where I can report harrassment? Thanks Bravo Plantation (talk) 17:10, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * has already pointed you to the Administrators' noticeboard for incidents; however, I would strongly advise that you do not report this there, because doing so would be tantamount to shooting yourself in the foot. The dispute resolution page has links to multiple forums where you can seek assistance from other uninvolved editors. The dispute resolution noticeboard would be a good starting point. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 17:18, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Could you please explain how this would be tantamount to me shooting myself in the foot? Thanks Bravo Plantation (talk) 17:29, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Please see the essay linked from my last comment above. The administrators' noticeboard for incidents is a highly visible board that has a lot of drama associated with it. People can get blocked and/or banned as a result of reports there. I don't report incidents or situations there except as a last resort. If you file a report there your actions will be scrutinized as well, and when it comes to light that you have launched personal attacks and vandalism (even though you have apologized for them, I think) and have been creating pages well out of guidelines, the court of public opinion may turn against you. A less dramatic noticeboard like the dispute resolution noticeboard would be a better place to get some help from uninvolved editors and while those editors may scrutinize your actions, they might not be as harsh on you as the editors that post on ANI. I'm not trying to discourage you; I'm only trying to share what I've experienced in posting on various forums.
 * Thank you for continuing to talk this out with . Working issues out through discussion is always preferred over posting on noticeboards. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 18:03, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Cold sea


A tag has been placed on Cold sea 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 that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Hqb (talk) 18:42, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

That particular bullshit excuse is used so often we already have a a whole page about it. By the way, if your account was compromised as you claim you will never be unblocked so that's really not a good approach to take. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:51, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Your language compromises Wikipedia's integrity. Also, if I am not reinstated, I shall sue under the Human Rights Act. Also those foul personal emails that Beeblebrox has sent me had better stop as there is no excuse for them Bravo Plantation (talk) 23:02, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Good luck with that. Until then, per WP:NLT, you will not be unblocked while your previous statement is in force. -- Kinu  t/c 23:07, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Which statement? Bravo Plantation (talk) 23:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Maybe its time for a talk page block, since he has used the word "sue". You can see my talk page for more examples of interaction. I'm done being nice, so should the rest of Wikipedia. ANI shouldn't be required for a talk page block, considering. Dennis Brown (talk) 23:14, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Your a bunch of Nazis all of you. Freedom of speech doesn't stretch to you lot does it? Your the first to bitch about the mean old SOPA, oh you were all crying about that, but the second someone says something about defending their own free speech, OH NO! We can't accept that. Well, I AM going to sue and regardless of whether I'm successful or not, I don't care at least it will make headlines somewhere. Goodnight.... and watch out for the mean old SOPA monster Bravo Plantation (talk) 23:19, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Talk page access revoked. And no, free speech is not a right on Wikipedia. -- Kinu  t/c 23:23, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved. Kinu t/c 23:24, 10 February 2012 (UTC)  Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive. ([ block log] • [ active blocks] • [ global blocks] • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • [ abuse filter log] • [ • change block settings • [ unblock] • [ checkuser] ([ log]))

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If you have already appealed to the Unblock Ticket Request System and been declined you may appeal to the the Arbitration Committee's Ban Appeals Subcommittee. Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

Nomination of Star Wars marathon for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Star Wars marathon 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 Articles for deletion/Star Wars marathon & 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. Safiel (talk) 21:55, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Cousin Fatstuff listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Cousin Fatstuff. Since you had some involvement with the Cousin Fatstuff redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. AldezD (talk) 19:41, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Horrorthon


The article Horrorthon has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * More of a term that people do-and considering that only one thing even mentions it being a term (in a film) and that's it.

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 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 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. Wgolf (talk) 21:48, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Baroness The Margaret Thatcher listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Baroness The Margaret Thatcher. Since you had some involvement with the Baroness The Margaret Thatcher redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. The Traditionalist (talk) 11:10, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Char Lee Slay Ter listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Char Lee Slay Ter. Since you had some involvement with the Char Lee Slay Ter redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ( talk ) 16:56, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Trump Raw listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Trump Raw. Since you had some involvement with the Trump Raw redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ( talk ) 18:51, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Tinned ham listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tinned ham. Since you had some involvement with the Tinned ham redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 00:04, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Canned ham listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Canned ham. Since you had some involvement with the Canned ham redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 00:05, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Yernly Fyerls and Nesbits


A tag has been placed on Yernly Fyerls and Nesbits, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do.

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 deleted 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. Thegreatluigi (talk) 20:17, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Two Ronnies 1987 Christmas Special


The article The Two Ronnies 1987 Christmas Special has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Not notable, unsourced"

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 notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing 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. Mccapra (talk) 22:14, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Karen Henthorn


The article Karen Henthorn has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. IW. (talk) 22:03, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

"Samwidge" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Samwidge. Since you had some involvement with the Samwidge redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. TheAwesome Hwyh  02:08, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Curry pie


The article Curry pie has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Per this discussion Talk:Curry_puff"

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 notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing 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. Spudlace (talk) 12:32, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

"Batman VI" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Batman VI and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 22 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC   678   02:15, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

"Batman V" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Batman V and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 22 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC   678   02:15, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

"Batman IV" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Batman IV and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 31 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC   678   04:44, 31 August 2022 (UTC)